rhe 


o 


Beet 
+ eee 
ip ate 
attire: 


. 
or 
ah 


te 


2926= 


# 


oy 


2 *)%) 
wait pete) 
jane 


hy 


ae 


ta pt bbe eee 
5) 


Heed! 
stn 


roe 
=e 


< 


: 
ce 
eres 
Sore: 
<737 
a 


et eet 
at 
- 


pars 
aaiee 


es 


eee 
~-a5 
— 


Bere hy 
seme 
eer 
eet 


wr ece 
ote 


tency S 
rere 


STE 
seis! 
SaSeree 


aot 
Mee 
omy 


eee! 
slaigtererese! 


ale 
vere 


ee 
oo 
Sats 


. 
wale 


eRe 


tatbtersie 


paeee ans 4 
obs es a petacsleyetibinig a 
title theltie ele e eerie v 
pes : See tee t ; 
- = S eleieie bere! 
othe * vee i ; . 
; slajhesee 
: 


roa ht Of Stat Mt Re eed 
eiete Tatare ele gie: 
et be elet bel aa tate 
$ et tata 
st wea 
Be tale eters 
Sieiotere wrerre sterors. 
plac it te Sest esi) 
Poet seer erat hie tr) 
Pe bee Beret 


‘ 
t 


Bee rece esécalbaereiets 


ee are rete! 
aivibleltetsteseressts 


> 
oe oe seater Ret ed 
Paes eevee 
ne 
eee eee 
STEM ae ets 
Fore rer heat ay Bf od ee ae 
; bPSt ot obs beat ot et 
as rave eetee! 
i 


Toe Oe Bee Reon | 


~~ 


: 
Pare Batt 
avagesSiegeset 
tee bees 
‘ anes % oiet let 
take gts 
. elysuy 


wee eles 


. 
epee i tot 
f fa) ate ie Bar . 


. 


Pore iors 
cere 


ere 
ree ae 
eee pire lt 
(tle + angele 
ai pees 


retars 
ane wen 
tEY77 ee eee eceree 


e aaee 
aly 
Selele 


a ee ers 


site ea gee aces 
eater ced 
ae ease bee 


eaat ates 
aaiievt 


hee 


J hisers : 
aes alelete 

nee Teele tatate asa 
vers 


pe leleiecacs 
+ ebb este 
tee 


: : 

ase ae: aay ; ‘ . 
ee 

i art | gre tasers H 


acres 
; 








The person charging this material is re- 
sponsible for its return to the library from 
which it was withdrawn on or before the 
Latest Date stamped below. 

Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books 


are reasons for disciplinary action and may 
result in dismissal from the University. 


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 





APR 0 8 1994 


L161— 0-1096 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2021 with funding from 
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 


https://archive.org/details/gospelofjohnhandOOrobi 


THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
NEW YORK + BOSTON + CHICAGO - DALLAS 
ATLANTA * SAN FRANCISCO 


MACMILLAN & CO., Limrrep 
LONDON + BOMBAY - CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 


THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Lap. 
TORONTO 


The Gospel of John 


A Handbook for Christian Leaders 


BY 
BENJAMIN W. ROBINSON 


PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION 
CHICAGO THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 


jQew Bork 
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
1925 
All rights reserved 


Copyricut, 1925, 
By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 





Set up and electrotyped. 
Published May, 1925. 


PRINTED 
| Ns steal 


a 


= 
<= 
— 


—_ 


PREFACE 


Intensive and prolonged study has been applied to the 
Gospel of John since the appearance of Westcott’s com- 
mentary over forty years ago, as well as to the general 
early Christian history of which it was a part. The 
results of this study are distributed through many vol- 
umes dealing with many separate phases of the subject 
But no single comprehensive, critical commentary embody- 
ing these results has appeared either in England or America 
in all these years. The aim of the following pages is to 
give, under successive chapter and verse headings, illus- 
trations of how this recent scholarly work is calculated to 
accentuate the marvelously vital and far-reaching popular 
power of this Gospel. 

Every Christian leader in these days should study to 
present his religion in a modern and forceful manner. 
The humanizing of knowledge, says James Harvey Robin- 
son, ‘‘is the supreme problem of our age’’ (Humanizing 
of Knowledge, p. 74). It is the purpose of this volume 
to aid in this task. To that end technical discussions are 
avoided as far as possible. 

There are scholars who ‘‘always write more or less 
unconsciously for one another.’’ ‘‘The specter haunts 
them, not of a puzzled and frustrated reader, but of a 
tart reviewer, likely to accuse them of superficiality or 
inaccuracy’’ (p. 101). ‘‘What a considerable and benefi- 
cent revolution would take place in teaching and writing 
if a teacher should’’ in writing a practical handbook ‘‘con- 
fine himself . . . to telling only such facts as play so impor- 
tant a part in his own everyday thinking that he could 
recall them without looking them up’’ (p. 106). 

5 


V8912h 


6 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


An extreme example of following this ideal may be found 
in the discussion of the Prologue of John in this volume, 
for the words ‘‘probably’’ and ‘‘uncertain’’ are largely 
avoided and ‘‘hypostatization’’ is noticeable by its absence. 

In reproducing sections of the text of the Gospel only 
as much is incorporated as is necessary for convenience 
in understanding the comments. In making the transla- 
tion used I have felt free to adopt any suggestions which 
came to me from previous translations, the Twentieth Cen- 
tury New Testament, Goodspeed’s New Testament and 
others. For supplementing the fragmentary sections of 
the text printed in this volume the reader will do well to 
keep one of these translations, preferably Goodspeed’s, at 
his elbow. 

References to modern literature are usually given by 
author only. A list of titles will be found in the Bibli- 
ography at the close of the volume. 

My indebtedness to others will be apparent on every page. 
To Professor Adolf Deissmann I owe much, not only on the 
subject of authorship, but on many other topics. To my 
friend Professor Ernst T. Krueger for helpful criticism of 
the manuscript, to my colleague Dr. Harold R. Willoughby 
for many suggestions, to my wife for tireless assistance with 
manuscript and index, to The Macmillan Company for 
efficient editorial co-operation, I desire to express here 
again my appreciation and thanks. 


BENJAMIN WILLARD ROBINSON. 


Chicago Theological Seminary, 
March 1, 1925. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER PAGE 
RE OR nike ianls 5) Cah iaketh Wied ile PIA aya. Mk poAEMT SVK edaea 5 
Pee tae CTO DE THE: GOSPET) oleic etila se eae ti ele a We dek 
Pi eRABACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL) ors Oe ie el seu ae 
fio Lar POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL | (5 cos oars LAO 
Dee PROLOGUE.) SOUT T3118 i ha lar esl en's AOE 
V. JOHN THE BAPTIST AND JESUS. John 1:19-51 . . . 66 
VI. THE WEDDING ANDTHE WINE. Johnir.....: 8&1 
Vie Be DIRE ROM UAROVES DL JONM TT Yo Ai Bee 
Miele are WATER OF LiRR. OMB TV: oes bi iy ae ah onl SL 
IX. HEALING OF THE MAN AT THE Poot. Johny. . . 126 
ee st SrA OFAN RA OO VE ite eto Oe heey 
alo) THE LIGHT oF THE WorRLD. Jobn yi tom . . . >. 154 
gee Con A000. SUEPHERD. | (JODIE) fy ven ed A LTE 
Danae ATE ANT uA) POU XTC .8 3 ee ee ee BAERS 
XIV. THE ANOINTING AND THE Foot WASHING. John XII 
CEL OT aU AL a OLA AE ieee A ROL I ACIP e's 6 
XV. JESUS’ RELATION To His Discretes. John xiv to xvi 215 
Vemeianet SOURS. POUND XVII GX Ky o5 cia asia” i SS 
SEEM MEEN CE LiTBRARY )\ GeO Va Lah oe a ime aes ooh ea URE 
aN 6 oC ESS ELS FO STi) ea A RP aI ORE NN aI RN 6109 
TNDEX ‘OF SORIPTURE. PASSAGES) yee eo ie Oe ee BBO 


OO CEL eee 
t vi i : a an er 






















y ae an r . Mods v1 
us Ne ai, Sh f Ue. : a eh 
DS * FOStany an ’ | ee ir muy - rh 
SRS RA ie a Gt 
ah Go ay 


e 
A ‘a fol & Pal Pe, By . yal 
Gas ? ¢ ’ i i f 4 id : i , 
y Ae ‘ a | 
A Ps PA 5 ' 
ye 
f : 1 ‘a a p Veet 


: 


nee ey book roy eae : > 
| AE ee ea 
Wi hd | ea “aah evn 

a RE ved Pa ES i ath ioc 


é . bd ne 
is “ a et ae viii 7 ait . seid Nae 
. , iin aye ¥) 
i . f lik ' iY ed ; Vv. Like § Yee di 
= Ve . ’ yA" Ab r At r? ; Me, - 
P 4 at's 
WPM iid.) teva sitsade heen ae 


| r one OG Le bis Be 
0 A : Bite | wae ib oeta itt Asta ‘é 5 te 


1 ¥ i” ' fl * ¢ rit - 
‘ i” ha 
| } rf ' . il Bo ee M ? i? ; ar digenes WG 


J 


Nu ; pt Lad ci ia Oe RS 
hy) a rer ; me ie 4) iin’ 

mM ite Rar a yy mesic 
(ers wie Pree ee ey | sient, . 


a! 





THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


wick 1 Mire 4 





THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


CHAPTER I 
THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 


John xxi, 20. Peter turning around sees the disciple 
whom Jesus loved following, the one who leaned back on 
his breast at the supper and said, Master, who is it that 
is going to betray you? 21. Peter seeing him says to 
Jesus, Master, what about this man? 22. Jesus says to 
him, If I wish him to tarry till I come, what is that to 
you? You are to follow me. 23. So the saying went forth 
among the brethren that that disciple would not die. Yet 
Jesus did not say to him that he would not die; but said, 
If I wish him to tarry till I come, what is that to you? 

24. This is the disciple who bears witness to these 
things and wrote these things. 

And we know that his testimony is true. 


1. Tradition ascribes the Fourth Gospel to the Apostle 
John. The only statement in the Gospel itself which has 
a direct bearing upon the authorship is found in xxi, 24. 
‘‘This is the disciple who. . . wrote these things; and we 
know that his testimony is true.’’ Evidently this statement 
is the note of one who declares not only that he knows who 
the author was, but knows also that the author’s testimony 
is trustworthy. We cannot tell whether the ‘‘we’’ is edi- 
torial, indicating one person, or whether several persons 
vouch for the trustworthiness of the author. 

Further study of chapter xxi makes it clear that the 

g hk 


12 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


chapter is an appendix added to the main body of the Gos- 
pel. The last verses of chapter xx are in form a conclusion. 
‘‘Many other signs Jesus showed which are not written 
in this book; but these are written that you may believe 
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing 
you may have life in his name.’’ One purpose sought to be 
accomplished by adding chapter xxi is easily apparent. 
It stands out prominently. There was current among 
Christians at the time the Gospel was written a belief that 
Jesus had promised the disciple whom he loved (20) that he 
‘‘would not die’’ (23). The author of the appendix admits 
that Jesus said something which might have been so under- 
stood, but denies that Jesus made this promise. ‘‘Jesus 
did not say that he would not die; but, If I wish him to 
tarry till I come, what is that to you?”’ 

The circumstances that led to the writing of such an 
explanation are not hard to imagine. ‘‘The disciple whom 
Jesus loved’’ had now lived on so many years that he had 
become the sole living witness who could say that he had 
personally known Jesus. The fact that he had grown so 
old had caused the report to spread that Jesus had prom- 
ised him that he would live till the inauguration of the 
Messianic kingdom at the Second Coming (Note esp. Luk. 
ix, 27). Finally, however, the veteran leader had died. 
His death caused some to lose faith in Jesus’ promises, 
and gave to others a pretext for criticism of the Christian 
religion. An explanation was necessary and imperative. 
The passage in chapter xxi is that explanation. 

Three facts are thus suggested as a working basis for 
further study. First, that the author is identified by 
xxl, 24, with ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ Second, 
that this disciple had continued his Christian labors among 
his people to an advanced old age. Third, this Gospel was 
published in its completed form, like Virgil’s Aeneid, after 
the death of its veteran author. 

2. Until recent years John, the Apostle, the son of 
Zebedee, was widely supposed to be this disciple. But this 


Tur AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 13 


is nowhere stated either in the New Testament or in any 
other Christian writing of New Testament times. Support 
for such an opinion has been found in Irenaeus near the 
end of the second century. It now seems doubtful, never- 
theless, whether even Irenaeus held this opinion.’ 

In the third century and later, however, it came to be 
assumed by Eusebius and others that the disciple ‘‘whom 
Jesus loved’’ must be one of the three favored Apostles, 
Peter, James, or John. John xxi, 7, pictures the loved 
disciple in conversation with Peter. Therefore Peter could 
not have been the one. Acts xii, 2, narrates the early death 
of James. Therefore James could not have been the vet- 
eran who was expected never to die. This process of elim- 
ination made it possible for Church fathers to argue that 
the aged disciple who wrote these things was John, the son 
of Zebedee. Westcott follows the same line of argument. 
The title of the Gospel, ‘‘ According to John,’’ which may 
date back to the second century, seemed to corroborate this 
conclusion, although there are many Johns mentioned both 
in the New Testament and in other early Christian writ- 
ings. The earliest known reference to this Gospel as the 
Gospel of ‘‘John’’ is found in Theophilus of Antioch 
(181 a.p.). 

In recent years much refractory evidence has come to 
light which makes it difficult to hold that the son of Zebedee 
was the one who reached an advanced old age and became 
the author of this Gospel. Papias writing about 140 ap. 
records that the Apostle John suffered a martyr’s death 
at the hands of the Jews. The Jews ceased to be a state 
before the year 70. Furthermore, the way in which Papias 
speaks in the same sentence of the martyrdom of James and 
John implies that John was killed early, like James (Acts 
xii, 2). John was alive in the year 48 (Gal. ii, 9). 

Formerly, the only authority for this statement of Papias 
was a quotation by George Hamartolos, which was long 
regarded as not sufficiently authenticated. But the dis- 

+Garvie, p. 252; Burney, pp. 138-142. 


14 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


covery of the De Boor fragment, first published in 1888, 
as Moffat says, ‘‘removes all doubts’’ that ‘‘Papias really 
wrote something to this effect.’’* That Papias spoke of the 
martyrdom of the Apostle John along with that of James 
is an established conclusion of modern research. 

Jesus prophesied that James and John would both like 
himself drink the cup of martyrdom (Mar. x, 39). This 
prophecy would not naturally have been recorded so prom- 
inently in Mark and Matthew if John was already ap- 
proaching old age at the time. ‘‘The cup that I drink . 
you shall drink; and with the baptism with which I am 
baptized shall you be baptized’? (Contrast John xxi, 22). 

Furthermore, in the lists of martyrs in the Syriae eal- 
endar the note for December 27th reads ‘‘ John and James, 
the apostles in Jerusalem,’’ just as the martyrdom of 
Stephen is noted on December 26th, and of Paul and Peter 
on December 28th. The mention of “‘Jerusalem’’ indicates 
the martyrdom occurred before 70 a.p. for Jerusalem was 
then destroyed. 

Aphrahat writing about 344 adds his bit to the evidence. 
He writes: ‘‘Great and excellent is the martyrdom of 
Jesus... and after him was the faithful martyr Stephen. 
. .. simon also and Paul were perfect martyrs. And 
James and John walked in the footsteps of Christ their 
master.’’ In the list of those who escaped martyrdom, 
given by Herakleon, the early Gnostic commentator quoted 
by Clement of Alexandria, are named Matthew, Philip, 
Thomas, Levi, but no John. Further items of evidence 
on this point may be found in the works of Schwartz, Bacon 
and Moffatt. 

Aside from the evidence for the martyr death of the 
Apostle John there are other reasons for doubting that the 
Gospel was written by the son of Zebedee. The Gospel is 
written in Greek, while the son of Zebedee was an Aramaic 
speaking fisherman of Galilee. Not only is the language a 
pure and simple Greek, showing very little Semitic influ- 

* Moffat, Literature of the New Testament, p. 604. 


Tur AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 15 


ence, but its ideas and presuppositions are distinctly Hel- 
lenistic. 

Moreover, the son of Zebedee does not fit the part played 
by the Beloved Disciple. There are several passages in the 
synoptic gospels throwing light on the character of the 
son of Zebedee. In Mark x he is deseribed as demanding 
along with James one of the chief seats in the kingdom. 
In another passage (Mar. iii, 17) James and John are 
surnamed ‘‘sons of thunder.’’ In a third passage (Luk. ix, 
51-56), telling how Jesus in going through Samaria en- 
countered a hostile attitude on the part of native villagers, 
James and John said, ‘‘ Master, do you wish that we bid fire 
to come down from heaven and consume them?’’ Mark 
ix, 38, is similar in tone. 

These narratives portray John, the son of Zebedee, as a 
very different man from the ‘‘beloved disciple’’ of the 
Fourth Gospel who leaned on Jesus’ breast at the supper. 

The reasons for holding that the author was not the 
son of Zebedee are thus at least five in number. (a) The 
Gospel makes no claim to have been written by the Apostle. 
Even the appendix does not state that the author was the 
Apostle John or son of Zebedee. (b) Outside the Gospel 
there is no hint of such authorship until the third century. 
(c) A large amount of historical evidence now indicates 
the early martyr death of John, the son of Zebedee. (d) 
The Gospel is Greek in language and thought. (e) The 
character of the son of Zebedee does not harmonize with 
the Johannine picture of the ‘‘beloved disciple.’’ 

3. Continued search after the author thus leads inevi- 
tably to a more detailed study of the question: Who was 
the Beloved Disciple? There are three passages which 
mention this ‘‘disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ In the third 
of these passages (xx, 2) the word ‘‘loved”’ is a different 
word in Greek, but the form used is the same noticeable 
imperfect tense and undoubtedly denotes the same disciple. 
The mention in the appendix (John xxi) already discussed 
is not included in the three passages. These passages con- 


16 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tain all the data known directly concerning the Beloved 
Disciple. 

His first appearance is in xiii, 23. It is the scene of 
the last supper. Jesus has conversed with the disciples, 
has girded himself and washed their feet and has spoken 
the word, ‘‘One of you will betray me.’’ Verse 23 then 
states: ‘‘There was at the table.’’ It is a phrase possibly 
indicating that the one about to be described has not yet 
been mentioned. The exact order and flavor of the Greek 
words are hard to reproduce in English. But it is a form 
of expression which would be quite lacking in force if 
the one of the twelve it served to introduce was generally 
known as the Beloved Disciple. In that case instead of 
‘‘There was reclining at the table one of his disciples, on 
Jesus’ bosom’’ we would expect some such words as, ‘‘Now 
that disciple whom Jesus loved was reclining on his bosom.’’ 

It is to be noted that John does not say that there were 
just twelve at the supper (contrast vi, 67; xx, 24). Mark 
says, ‘‘He comes with the twelve’? (Mar. xiv, 17), but 
when Jesus says ‘‘One of you shall betray me,’’ Jesus adds, 
‘‘It is one of the twelve’’ (Mar. xiv, 20) as though some 
one outside the Twelve might be present. Jesus, of course, 
had many disciples outside the number of the Twelve. The 
picture drawn in John’s verses is of one outside the 
number. Such a one could more appropriately ask the 
question, ‘‘Lord, who is it?’’ 

Moreover, it is rather difficult to imagine Jesus eating 
the last supper in a private home without the presence of 
the host or of some one representing the household. Fur- 
thermore, some young man of Jerusalem for whom Jesus 
had conceived a particular affection might very well be 
the one who reclined at Jesus’ right at table and is pic- 
tured as ‘‘leaning back as he was on Jesus’ breast.’’ This 
would relieve the embarrassment of ascribing to Jesus 
such an exhibition of affectionate partiality toward one 
of the Twelve. 

Bacon holds that the disciple thus described is an ideal 


THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 17 


figure who represents better understanding of Jesus than 
that of any of the Twelve, a type of the Christian who 
through mystic communion comes close to the heart of 
Jesus. The form of the statement, ‘‘There was at the 
table,’’ and the situation as described, seem to point to one 
of these two alternatives, either to Bacon’s that the Beloved 
Disciple is a purely imaginary figure, or else to the view 
that he was one of the real disciples but not of the Twelve. 
Moffatt, Burkitt, Bousset, Deissmann, Gardner, Garvie, 
Burney, Stanton, Jackson, and most others agree that the 
Beloved Disciple was a real person, either the son of Zebe- 
dee or a Jerusalem disciple. No other Christian character 
in this Gospel can be shown to be imaginary. To Moffatt 
the chief objection against his being an ‘‘imaginary’’ figure 
is ‘‘the psychological difficulty of conceiving how an ab- 
stract figure could be put side by side with the other 
disciples’’ (p. 567). 

The other and simpler theory that the Beloved Disciple 
was a youth living in Jerusalem who became Jesus’ disciple 
in the last days, and was loved by him with a fatherly 
affection, ‘‘has considerable plausibility.’’* Such a dis- 
ciple might well be a Greek or Hellenist who could later 
write a gospel in Greek. John has informed us that there 
were ‘‘Greeks’’ ‘‘at the feast’’ who came and said, ‘‘We 
would see Jesus’’ (xii, 20-21). The Beloved Disciple must 
have been such a young man as could outlive all other 
personal disciples of Jesus in order to fit the description 
given in the appendix of the Gospel (xxi, 20-24). That 
would also make possible the dating of the Gospel near 
the end of the first century, a date which seems to be de- 
manded by the point of view and general character of the 
book. 

The second appearance of the Beloved Disciple is in xix, 
26, in the scene at the cross. ‘‘ When Jesus sees his mother, 
and the disciple whom he loved standing by, he says to 


* Bacon, Fourth Gospel, pp. 301-331. 
"Moffatt, p. 567. 


18 Tuer GosPEL oF JOHN 


his mother, There is your son! Then he says to the 
the disciple, There is your mother! And from that hour 
the disciple took her into his own home.’’ If the Beloved 
Disciple were a Galilean, he could hardly have taken the 
mother from Jerusalem to his home in that same ‘‘hour.’’ 
If the passage is to be taken literally at all it is further 
evidence that the disciple to whom Jesus entrusts his 
mother who is without a home of her own in Jerusalem is 
one who does have a home there. 

The third and only other appearance of the Beloved 
Disciple is in chapter xx. Peter and the ‘‘disciple whom 
Jesus loved’’ were on their way to the empty tomb. ‘‘And 
they both ran together: and the other disciple outran Peter 
and came first to the tomb.’’ It is the picture of a youth 
going as a companion with Peter to the tomb, who breaks 
into a run, and then as Peter also starts to run, outstrips 
Peter and comes first to the tomb. ‘‘Yet he did not enter 
in,’’ again suggests a youth who though arriving first 
defers to Peter and allows him to enter first. 

4. Could a disciple outside the company of the Twelve 
be known as ‘‘the Beloved Disciple’’? The word ‘‘beloved’’ 
is, of course, a later word. The phrase of the Gospel is 
always ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ What is the 
exact meaning of the verb ‘‘loved’’? Investigation of 
the usage of the word soon reveals the fact that the same 
verb is used regarding some disciples not included among 
the Twelve. In fact, a somewhat different verb is used 
regarding the Twelve. In xiii, 1, John says that Jesus 
‘‘loved’’ his own unto the end. The reference is probably 
to Jesus’ devotion to his circle of twelve disciples. In 
this passage the word ‘‘loved’’ is the aorist tense and is 
not the same form used later in the same chapter in the 
expression ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ In the 
latter phrase the form used is the imperfect tense. 

A parallel to this peculiar use of the imperfect tense 
may be found in xi, 5, in the story of Jesus’ visit at the 
home of Lazarus. ‘‘Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sis- 


THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 19 


ter and Lazarus.’’ The word used to express Jesus’ rela- 
tion to Martha and Mary and Lazarus is precisely the 
same word in form and tense and spelling as the word 
used to express Jesus’ relation to the disciple in question. 
The meaning was in all probability the same. 

Whatever we understand the phrase ‘‘the disciple whom 
Jesus loved’’ to mean must be understood of the words 
expressing Jesus’ love for Lazarus and his family. In 
both cases it was not the love that conferred precedence 
and preference and authority but that form of affectionate 
regard manifested in occasional and repeated visits—a 
domestic rather than an official partiality. Certainly there 
ean be no valid objection to the view that the disciple whom 
Jesus loved in this sense might easily have been one who 
was not a member of the Twelve. 

Long years afterward the usage became a popular one 
and we may imagine the pleasure with which various 
groups of Christians might call their local veteran leader 
‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ The word ‘‘the’’ sig- 
nified that there was no other survivor present in a com- 
munity ‘‘whom Jesus loved.’’ All the others whom Jesus 
had loved had passed on or were living elsewhere. 

Turning once more to the appendix we notice that the 
disciple whom Jesus loved (xxi, 7) is one of a company 
composed of Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, 
‘f‘and two other’’ of his disciples (xxi, 2). The older 
assumption used to be that the Beloved Disciple would be 
of the inner circle and that he could not be Thomas, nor 
Nathanael, nor one of the two unnamed ‘‘disciples,’’ but 
must be one of the sons of Zebedee. But now, on the con- 
trary, it seems altogether natural to regard him as one 
of the two ‘‘disciples.’’ In fact the use of the same word 
‘*disciple’’ repeated in verse 7 from verse 2 would seem 
to be additional indication that he was one of these two 
disciples rather than a son of Zebedee. 

5. Is there any early Christian leader outside the circle 
of the Twelve who is known by name and who may be 


20 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


identified as this disciple whom Jesus loved? That ques- 
tion naturally resolves itself into two others. Where was 
this Gospel written? Was there living in that place any 
outstanding figure who had been a personal disciple of 
Jesus? 

That the Fourth Gospel was written in Ephesus is at- 
tested both by external tradition and by the internal evi- 
dence. Moffatt’s statement is as follows: ‘‘The Ephesian 
locus of the Fourth Gospel in its present form is indi- 
eated, not only by the external evidence of tradition, but 
by converging lines of internal evidence, e.g., the fact that 
it springs from the same circle or school as the apocalypse 
(itself an undoubtedly Asiatic document), the presence of 
the Ephesian Logos ideas, and of the controversy with 
the Baptist’s followers’’ (p. 618). 

Was there living in Ephesus any leader who had been a 
personal disciple of Jesus? At once the historian answers 
that in Ephesus there was a disciple of Jesus named John, 
known as ‘‘the veteran’’ preacher because of his advancing 
years. Papias’ words (140 a.p.) are very clear. He says 
that there were two Johns, both disciples of the Lord; 
that the Galilean Apostle was one and the other was the 
‘“veteran’’ or ‘‘presbyter’’ John. In the days of Eusebius 
the tomb of John, was still to be seen at Ephesus.’ 

Papias’ words are as follows: ‘‘If then any one came 
who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him 
in regard to the words of the elders—what Andrew or 
what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, 
or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other 
of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and 
the presbyter (elder) John, the disciples of the Lord, say.’’ ° 

Papias applies the word ‘‘disciple’’ to the second John 
exactly the same as in the ease of the first John. But he 
uses the past tense ‘‘said’’ of the Apostle John, indicating 
that he had died before Papias’ day (Papias was born a 


®Ch. Hist. IIT, 39:6. 
‘Hus. Ch. Hist. III, 39:4. 


THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 21 


little after 70) ; whereas he uses the present tense, ‘‘say,’’ 
of the presbyter John, thus indicating that in Papias’ youth 
this disciple was probably still living. 

Irenaeus also writes that Papias ‘‘was a hearer of John,’’ 
and means that he was a hearer of a John who had heard 
Jesus.. After referring to this statement of Irenaeus, 
Eusebius proceeds to show at great length that the John 
whom Papias heard was not the Apostle John but the other 
John (III 39:1-7). 

Abbott * cited by Moffatt (p. 600) does not question that 
the phrase ‘‘disciple of the Lord’’ in the quotation from 
Papias must mean one who had been with Jesus personally. 
However, he sees a chronological obstacle to supposing that 
a disciple who had been with Jesus was alive in Papias’ 
day and concludes there must be an error in the text. But 
this chronological difficulty is overcome if we agree that 
the disciple was a mere youth when Jesus died and that 
Papias knows him only in his old age as the elder or 
veteran. 

This veteran John of Ephesus is undoubtedly the John 
with whom Polycarp says that he had talked and who had 
‘‘seen the Lord.’’*® Polyearp was martyred in 155 at the 
age of eighty-five and so he must have been born about 
the year 70 a.p. John the Apostle was martyred before 
that date in all probability. Three passages in Eusebius 
tend to support the position that Polycarp knew 
a John who had seen Jesus. In III, 36:1, Eusebius states 
that Polyearp was entrusted with the episcopate of the 
church at Smyrna by those ‘‘who had seen and heard the 
Lord.’’ 

Again in IV, 14:3, Eusebius says among the instructors 
of Polyearp were ones ‘‘who had seen Christ.’’ Again in 
V, 20:6, in the statement that Irenaeus had heard Polycarp 
say he had talked with those who had ‘‘seen the Lord,”’ 

*Hus. Ch. Hist. III, 39:1. 


§ Fine. Bibl. 1815. 
®*Hus. Ch. Hist. V, 20:6. 


22 Tuer GOSPEL OF JOHN 


John is the only one of these latter mentioned by name. 
It is significant that Irenaeus does not ascribe to Polyearp 
a statement that he had heard the Apostle John, but that 
he had heard a John who had seen Jesus. 

Since the early death of John the Apostle can now be 
regarded as well established, there can be little or no doubt 
that these statements of Papias, and Polyearp, and Ire- 
naeus, and Eusebius indicate that there lived at Ephesus 
a Christian preacher and leader known as the presbyter 
John, who had been a disciple of Jesus. He fits into the 
framework of all the facts discovered in the search for 
the author of the Gospel. He may have fled to Ephesus 
at the time of the approaching destruction of Jerusalem 
(70 A.D.) or he may have become a resident earlier. He 
shows himself to be more of a Greek than a Jew, and in 
any case his had been a long ministry in Ephesus before 
the writing of the Gospel. If he lived to a very advanced 
age—eighty-five years or more (xxi, 23), his death would 
not have occurred earlier than the year 100, which may be 
regarded as the date of the publication of the Gospel. 

6. In connection with the search for the author the 
question finally arises: Does this Gospel betray the fact 
that it was written by an eye-witness? Are there traces in 
it of a character that make it clear it was written by one 
who had known Jesus personally? Fortunately, a beau- 
tiful parallel example exists in Greek literature—Plato’s 
portrayal of Socrates. Though it differs radically from 
that of Xenophon, it by no means proves that Plato had 
never known Socrates. 

Any one who has difficulty in understanding John’s way 
of presenting Jesus should read the Phaedo and then some 
of the later Dialogues of Plato. The way in which Plato 
has portrayed his master and his teaching led Phillips 
Brooks and others to refer to Plato as the Beloved Disciple 
of Socrates. Recently, a large amount of new information 
regarding the environment of John’s Gospel has come to 
light; and the question of eye-witness authorship has as- 


THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 23 


sumed new aspects. It used to be too readily assumed by 
scholars that the Fourth Gospel could not have been written 
by a personal disciple. 

Some of the facts involved in a reconsideration of the 
question are: (a) The recognition that the evidence is 
very slight for identifying the Beloved Disciple with John, 
the son of Zebedee, has disposed of the old alternative 
of Galilean authorship as against second century author- 
ship. (b) The abundant illustrations of the ‘‘I’’ style in 
religious instruction in the Hellenistic world have made 
the problem of the use of it in John’s report of Jesus’ 
words a very simple one. (c) The study of the mystery 
religions of the first century has made the attitude toward 
Jesus reflected in the Gospel natural and intelligible. 
(d) The revelation of their colloquial style and dialect in 
newly discovered papyri has clearly shown that the Fourth 
Gospel was not composed as a treatise on theology or 
Christology, but that it is really written in extremely 
simple language for popular use. 

(a) Was the author the fisherman of Galilee or was he a 
second-century theologian, was the old alternative regard- 
ing authorship. Traditionalists held the former, and stu- 
dents of historical theology leaned to the latter. No 
interest was taken in a middle ground. 

The alternative is well stated by Bacon.” Discussing 
the lack of geographical knowledge of Galilee shown by the 
author of the Gospel, he says: ‘‘The limitation of his 
.. . knowledge. .. and... the transfer from Galilee to 
Jerusalem of the center of gravity of Jesus’ work bespeak 
not the companion of Jesus’ walks about the villages of 
Galilee and Perea, but the pilgrim antiquary of a century 
after, whose starting point is Jerusalem.’’ 

It is generally admitted that the author had knowledge 
of Jerusalem topography. His limited knowledge of Galilee, 
and emphasis upon the Judean ministry, argue against au- 
thorship by the son of Zebedee, but have no weight against 

The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate, p. 389. 


24 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


authorship by a Jerusalem disciple. It is quite generally 
admitted that the author’s information regarding the last 
week in some particulars surpasses that of the synoptic 
gospels. Those who held to second-century authorship sup- 
posed that this superiority was due to the sources which the 
author had at hand, composed by an earlier writer. 

Certain passages in the Gospel plainly suggest author- 
ship by an eye-witness. In xix, 35, in the scene at the 
cross it is possible to regard the words as based upon an 
earlier source, but in the light of other passages it is more 
natural to take them on the authority of the author of the 
Gospel: ‘‘He that has seen has born witness in order that 
you also may believe.’’ Other passages of this kind will 
be noted in the later chapters of this volume. ‘‘There 
are,’’ aS Scott says, ‘‘several historical questions of capital 
importance (e.g., the length of our Lord’s ministry, the 
procedure followed at the trial, the date of the Crucifixion) 
in which the evidence of the Fourth Gospel seems prefer- 
able to that of the other three.’’” Bacon (Chap. XV) 
believes that the author had been in Palestine. Moffatt 
(p. 547), who holds to second-century authorship, admits 
there are passages indicating the author had been in Jeru- 
salem before the year 70. Burton” concludes that the 
author’s knowledge of Jewish customs, and the Jewish eal- 
endar, and of the topography of Jerusalem indicate a prob- 
ability that he had resided in Palestine before the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem. All seem to agree that the author had 
lived in or near Jerusalem for a shorter or longer time. 

In this connection the first Epistle of John adds its bit 
of evidence. It was probably written by the same author 
as the Gospel. Similarities in style are so numerous and 
striking as to make the probability almost conclusive. The 
evidence is well given by Brooke in the International Crit- 
ical Commentary, pp. i-xix. 

Take I John i, 1, 2, which states: ‘‘That which... we 


4% Hist. and Rel. Value, pp. 18-14. 
2 Short Introduction to the Gospels, pp. 105, 109. 


THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 755 


have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that 
which we beheld, and our hands handled . . . we have seen 
and bear witness and declare unto you the life. . . which 

. . was manifested unto us.’’ These words, as Brooke 
says, ‘‘can only be interpreted naturally as a claim on 
the writer’s part to have been an actual eye-witness of the 
earthly life of Jesus Christ.’’ 

(b) Again, it has been commonly held that the author 
could not be a personal disciple of Jesus because of his use 
of what has now been named the ‘‘I’’ style of teaching. 
Evidence has now been published which shows that throw- 
ing the teaching and rank of the central figure of a 
religion into the first person by his leading followers 
was an accepted religious usage of the times. Examples 
are best given by Deissmann in his ‘‘ Light from the Ancient 
EKast’’ (II, 3, H.). They prove that the ‘‘I’’ style for 
religious use was as natural in Ephesus as are the Archaic 
English forms in use among us in worship today. This 
made it as easy for John in giving his Christian teaching 
to assume the ‘‘I’’ style as it is in modern times for any 
Church member to pick up the forms ‘‘Thee’’ and ‘‘ Thou’’ 
and ‘‘Art’’ and ‘‘Wast’’ when offering prayer. John 
could put his thought of Jesus into the forms ‘‘I am the 
door,’’ ‘‘I am the good shepherd,’’ where no living follower 
of Jesus today would think of saying anything but ‘‘He 
is the door,’’ ‘‘He is the good shepherd.’’ They represent 
the easy natural religious language of Ephesus, and do not 
presuppose a scholastic background or a theological atti- 
tude either on the part of John or of Jesus. This subject 
will be discussed at much greater length in later chapters, 
especially in the comments on John x. 

(c) A third difficulty with eye-witness authorship is 
usually stated thus: No one who had personally known 
Jesus could possibly think of him as the preéxistent. Logos 
and use the terms approaching deification of him found in 
this Gospel. Recent study of the mystery religions 
has given us a somewhat different basis from which to 


26 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


view this situation. On coming to Ephesus, John would 
find that the Christian religion there, which had already 
developed into a cult of Jesus, had adopted many words 
and ideas from the Hellenistic religions. Naturally an 
Ephesus author of the Gospel would accept much of what 
he found. Even Paul, who had lived many years in Jeru- 
salem, and was a contemporary of Jesus, had in Hellenistic 
lands spoken of Jesus in terms implying his preéxistence 
and his divinity. What Paul did the ‘‘Beloved Disciple’’ 
may also do. John only follows a precedent which Paul 
had set. Paul’s three years in Ephesus preceded John’s 
coming by many years and it was along the lines of the 
teaching of Paul that the Ephesian church had developed. 
The author of this Gospel, as will be explained in the chap- 
ter on The Prologue, does not so much advance a theology 
original with himself as endeavor to translate his views 
of the Christian experience into the terms of the thought- 
world which he found in Ephesus. No obstacle to finding 
in the Gospel a view of Jesus entirely natural to one who 
had been his personal disciple remains if it is borne in 
mind from the outset that when John came to Ephesus 
he found the Cult of Jesus far advanced beyond the gospel 
as preached by Paul. See the section on Gnosticism in the 
next chapter; see also comments on John viii, 58. 

(d) A fourth consideration is the bearing of the popular 
style of the Gospel on the problem of its authorship. Until 
very recent years it was generally supposed that the lan- 
guage of the Gospel was a Semitic Greek, 7.e., the product 
that might be expected from the effort of a Jew to write 
in the Greek language. The ‘‘and...and...and”’ 
paratactic form of expression found throughout the Gos- 
pel was explained as a Hebraism. Thousands of private 
letters and other domestic documents which have been dis- 
covered and published in recent years have thrown a flood 
of light across the pages of this Gospel. 

It is now clear that the striking peculiarity of the style 
of the Fourth Gospel is the marked simplicity of its col- 


THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 26 


loquial and narrative language and not its Semitic quality. 
The book is not written in the Greek of the philosopher 
or historian, but in the vernacular of the people. This 
discovery of its utterly informal character dispels much of 
the atmosphere of dogmatic theology which has been used 
as an argument against its eye-witness authorship. Rather 
it may now be said that the narratives of this Gospel en- 
deavor to give Paul’s spiritual Christ a body of flesh 
and to make concrete and popularly intelligible a Jesus 
who at Ephesus had become too abstract and theological. 

7. The conclusions that may be said to have been reached 
in this survey are these. The Fourth Gospel nowhere names 
its author. It was written by a Greek-speaking Christian 
leader of Ephesus. If we cannot be content to let the 
author remain anonymous we ean reconstruct a possible 
identification of him as follows: There was a young 
man in Jerusalem, a Greek or Hellenist, whom Jesus 
‘‘loved’’ as he ‘‘loved’’ Lazarus or Martha of Bethany. 
As Jesus ate a supper in the home of Lazarus, so in Jeru- 
salem he ate a supper at the home of this disciple there 
whom he loved. It was his last supper. At the eross 
Jesus, thoughtful of the future of his mother, asked him 
to take her to his home. This disciple was among the first 
to visit his tomb. He moved from Jerusalem before the 
destruction of the city in 70 and went to Ephesus. There 
he found a Christian church which had developed along 
the lines of Paul’s teaching. He labored many years 
among these people, ballasting their devotion to the in- 
visible Christ by an emphasis on the reality of Jesus’ 
earthly life and on the beauty of personal discipleship to 
him. During the passage of years he became known as 
the ‘‘veteran’’ or ‘‘presbyter,’’ and may be the presbyter 
John mentioned by Papias and Eusebius. Toward the 
close of a long ministry he gathered and put together the 
materials of his Gospel, which was published soon after 
the death of its author. 

Any one who desires to better his acquaintance with 


28 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the personality of the author may do so by reading the 
Epistles of John, which seem to be written by the same 
hand. The letter called II John indicates that he was, in 
his mature years, no such sentimental, mild-faced man as 
he is usually painted by the old masters. The picture there 
is of a vigorous preacher, a ‘‘veteran’’ leader. ‘‘Many de- 
ceivers are gone forth.. .. This is the deceiver and anti- 
Christ... . Give him no greeting.’’ Again in III John 
we have similar testimony. Here he has an opponent 
whom he faces squarely. ‘‘Diotrephes, who loves to have 
the preéminence among them, receives us not. Therefore if 
I come I will bring to remembrance his works which he 
does, prating against us with wicked words.’’ His capacity 
for large-hearted joy is reflected in II John, 4. Noticeable 
in I John is the way affection is combined with strength of 
character in his fatherly habit of saying ‘‘Beloved’’ and 
‘‘Little children’? (I John, ii, 7, 18). 

Many traits in the character of the veteran leader have 
been grasped and well portrayed by Robert Browning in 
his poem, ‘‘A Death in the Desert,’’ which gives a poet’s 
conception of the last hours of John’s life: 


We had him bedded on a camel-skin 
And waited for his dying all the while. 


Then the boy sprang up from his knees 


And spoke, as ’twere his mouth proclaiming first, 
“T am the Resurrection and the Life.” 
Whereat he opened his eyes wide at once 
And sat up of himself, and looked at us. 


“Nay, do not give me wine, for I am strong, 
“But place my gospel where I put my hands. 


“For if there be a further woe 

“Wherein my brothers struggling need a hand, 
“So long as any pulse is left in mine, 

“May I be absent even longer yet, 

“Plucking the blind ones back from the abyss, 
“Though I should tarry a new hundred years.” 


CHAPTER II 
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 


The Gospel of John has many peculiar characteristics 
which affect its whole structure. They are as recognizable 
as traits of character in a man or woman. The Gospel 
is a vital part of the life, in fact, of the man who wrote it, 
and is a reflection and index in considerable measure for 
that reason of his personality. Scott in reading the char- 
acter of the author from the pages of the Gospel says that 
he “‘is not primarily a theologian, but a man of profound 
religious feeling. Ideas flow in upon him from various 
sources—from primitive Christian tradition, Paulinism, 
Alexandrian speculation ; and he does not attempt to reason 
them out, or to codrdinate them into a system.... As 
long as he responds to them with some side of his religious 
nature, he is willing to accept them. He tests them, not 
by any logical eriterion, but by an inward tact and sym- 
pathy.’’* Let us go on to name and describe some of these 
peculiar characteristics: 

1. In the first place, the author carries on a constant 
partisan controversy with the Jews. At the time he is 
composing his Gospel Christianity is severing the ties of 
its origin with Judaism even more radically than in Paul’s 
day. Jews far outnumbered Christians in the Empire, but 
in Ephesus it would seem that the race between them was 
close. Although the Jews were making proselytes, the 
Christian church had a chance, with vigorous preaching, 
to outstrip its rival. Our author felt keenly on the sub- 

1Fourth Gospel, pp. 14-15. 

29 


30 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ject of the imperfection and inferiority of some features 
of the Jewish religion. Although Jesus and all the Apostles 
were Jews, the striking fact which confronts the reader 
of John’s Gospel is that in Ephesus, nevertheless, the mere 
phrase, ‘‘the Jews,’’ without qualification, seems sufficient 
to reveal the identity of the opponents of Christianity. It 
occupies the same place as ‘‘hypocrites’’ or ‘‘seribes and 
Pharisees’’ occupy in the synoptic gospels. 

The hostility in John’s Gospel toward the Jews has 
usually been laid solely to the rivalry between the Jewish 
synagogue and the Christian church in Ephesus. A second 
consideration, however, should enter into it. As will be 
explained in our next chapter, John had a preference for 
the conversational style of presentation. A definite dra- 
matic clash must be led up to in his succession of question 
and answer because the purpose of such dialogue always 
is to bring out more clearly the author’s views of its spir- 
itual significance. A party of the second part who should 
play the part of the objector or of the spiritually obtuse is 
necessary to the discussion as he conducts it. The author 
uses ‘‘the Jews’’ for this purpose throughout the Gospel. 
‘Certain of the Jews,’’ or ‘‘certain dull-minded persons,’’ 
would have answered, but ‘‘the Jews’’ was shorter and 
simpler. Gardner says concerning chapter vi of the Gospel 
(p. 207-8): ‘‘It may seem a violent interpretation, when 
the Evangelist says ‘the Jews,’ to interpret him as mean- 
ing any literalist, whether Jew or Gentile, but it is clear 
that he uses the word in this sense in passage after passage. 
At any rate, ‘the Jews’ are opponents of the truth, and 
not convineed adherents. The stupidity and materialism 
of the auditors is used as a foil to bring out the noble 
spirituality of the teaching.’’ 

2. A second characteristic of the Gospel is a polemic 
attitude toward the sect of John the Baptist. Much has 
been learned in recent years about this sect. The religion 
of John the Baptist seems to have been a thriving one, for 
traces of it are found down into the third century. It 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL $i 


will help greatly to understand the Fourth Gospel if we 
think that a church of the sect of John the Baptist was 
probably located a short distance from the Christian church 
in which our author was preaching in Ephesus. Jesus 
said that before his coming there was none greater than the 
Baptist, but in the Fourth Gospel his insignificance is em- 
phasized. He becomes merely a ‘‘witness’”’ to Jesus and 
when that is given, his part is played. 

The heart of the preaching of the Baptist was the pic- 
ture of a coming terrible Day of Judgment. His followers 
in Ephesus probably preached a similar gospel of waiting 
for a judgment. This would be in sharp contrast to one 
who defined judgment in the words of John iii, 19, and 
who preached a joy of abundance of life in Jesus. The 
polemic against the sect of the Baptist may be read in 
every mention of the Forerunner in the Gospel. The 
ehurch of the Baptist in Ephesus is described in Acts xviil, 
24 to xix, 7. This subject will be presented more in detail 
in the comments on John i, 19-28. 

3. A third characteristic is the nature of the author’s 
purpose, which is religious rather than historical or theo- 
logical. Not by any mental acceptance of the presentation 
of the way of salvation through Christ by some apostle 
did Paul become a Christian. Paul had found Jesus by 
spiritual contact with him personally. That had emanci- 
pated him from slavery to Jewish ceremonialism and legal- 
ism. In like manner John bases his religion upon the power 
of Jesus personally manifested in his own life and in the 
lives of other Christians. Although unfortunately we have 
no such knowledge of the author’s conversion as we have 
of Paul’s, it is less necessary because universal Christian 
experience is his starting point. 

John always puts religion first. His Gospel is in no 
sense intended to be a mere compendium of historical facts 
concerning Jesus. It advocates a living and many sided 
reincarnation in Ephesus of the life of Jesus. Luke’s 
statement of the purpose of his Gospel makes an interest- 


32 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ing contrast with John’s statement of his purpose. Luke’s 
purpose was ‘‘to write to you in explicit order, most 
excellent Theophilus, so that you might know the certainty 
concerning the things in which you were instructed.’’ John 
states his purpose in xx, 31, ‘‘These things are written 
that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
God, and that, through believing, you may have life in 
his name.’’ Where there are two parallel members of a 
statement in John, the emphasis is upon the second (cf. 
iii, 5). His purpose, therefore, in his Gospel is that men 
and women may attain the higher ‘‘life.’? Life in John 
always means a new and different life not to be found 
elsewhere that begins at the time of entering into fellow- 
ship with Jesus. 

The statement that John places religion above history 
is sometimes misunderstood to mean that he has no par- 
ticular interest in the Jesus of history, but is mainly con- 
cerned with a theological system. Exactly the reverse is 
true. The author uses history as a basis of his religion. 
It was his conscious task and his supreme accomplishment 
to combine the two. 

4. Emphasis upon the historical Jesus as the source and 
foundation of the Christian religion is a distinet charac- 
teristic of the Gospel. The Christian religion which the 
author found there on coming to Ephesus had been devel- 
oped out of the teaching of Paul. Paul had had practi- 
eally nothing to say concerning the ministry of Jesus. His 
teaching centered around the death and resurrection. The 
prevailing mystery religions of the first century that af- 
ford a very clear idea of the nature of the cult which had 
developed in Ephesus will be described in connection with 
our comments on John xi. 

Finding in Ephesus a mystery cult of Jesus tending 
toward speculation, asceticism, mysticism and Gnosticism, 
John conceived it to be his chief duty to subject it to the 
modifications sure to follow upon a personal acquaintance 
with the earthly Jesus. He felt that the power of the 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 33 


Spirit and the ‘‘Gifts of the Spirit’’ (cf., I Cor. xii-xiv) 
must not continue unrelated among them to Jesus of 
Nazareth. The example and inspiration which Jesus had 
been to his personal followers, through their intimate ac- 
quaintance with him, John felt could still be maintained 
after Jesus was gone. Not in forgetting the earthly Jesus, 
as Pauline Christians were doing, would Christians live 
best, but by holding to the facts of his life as the basis of 
communion with that invisible Lord who dwells spiritually 
among his followers. Why should they miss the undying 
inspiration enshrined in the story of the simple compan- 
ionship of the first disciples with Jesus in Galilee? For 
this purpose he wrote of Jesus as he himself had known 
him in order to intertwine that Jesus with the exalted 
Jesus that was being worshiped in Ephesus. His Gospel 
injected into the Ephesian worship a vivid sense of the 
historic Jesus. The powerful appeal of the Hellenistic 
mystery religions lay in their promise of a fullness of life. 
Jewish Christianity rested its cause upon the example in 
Jesus of brotherly self-sacrificing love. Hellenistic Chris- 
tianity by combining the two became a world-religion. It 
was John who did the work of combination. In his Chris- 
tianity the fullness of life in the Gifts of the Spirit min- 
gled and was mixed with a personal discipleship to ‘‘ Jesus 
of Nazareth.’’ 

5. The means employed by John to effect the combina- 
tion was the use of symbolism. An Ephesian significance 
was given to the opening of the eyes of a blind man by 
Jesus in Galilee or Jerusalem by making the story a 
symbol of the standing miracle of the giving of light to 
darkened or blinded souls constantly taking place before 
their eyes in Ephesus. Light was one of the largest words 
of the mystery religions, but as it figured in those re- 
ligions, light was largely impersonal. A bond with Pales- 
tine for the high place given to light in the religion of 
Ephesus was provided in John’s Gospel by making Jesus 
himself (John ix) the ‘‘Light of the World.’’ Not only 


34 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the work of opening the eyes of the blind which Jesus 
began in Palestine was Jesus continuing in Ephesus, but 
he continued to feed the ‘‘hungry’’ in Ephesus (John vi) 
as he had also fed the ‘‘hungry’’ multitude in Palestine. 
John similarly carried out his use of symbolism into many 
other phases of daily life. Marriage, birth, water, bread, 
illness, death—all appear both as incidents in the min- 
istry of Jesus and as symbols of spiritual events in Ephesus. 
Thus the author did his work of combining the earthly 
life of Jesus and the language and life and Christian re- 
ligion current in the Greek city of Ephesus, where he 
had made his home. 

6. The resemblance of the Gospel of John to the teach- 
ing of Paul is a close one. The usual way of putting it is 
to say that Paul is the mediating link between John and 
the earlier gospels. This is likely to be understood to 
mean that together the three form a straight line of devel- 
opment. Possibly it would be better to say that John 
brought the Pauline religion back from its later wander- 
ings toward a realization of the historic Jesus, from which 
it had strayed too far. In any ease the Gospel of John 
eannot be perfectly understood without an acquaintance 
with Paul and his gospel. Emphasis upon the power of 
the Spirit as the regenerating agency of God is fundamental 
both for Paul and for John. Drawing a sharp contrast 
between the non-Christian and the Christian life is also 
fundamental for both. It has sometimes been said that 
the Fourth Gospel is such a gospel as Paul would have 
composed if he had attempted to write one. Paul set 
such store by the regenerating influence of the Spirit and 
felt that a knowledge of the Palestinian career of the his- 
toric Jesus was so relatively unimportant that he never 
thought of writing a gospel. 

In the days between the death of Paul and the days of 
John’s Gospel, however, the ‘‘spirit’’ had led different 
men in opposite paths. Some had gone the road to abso- 
lute asceticism and to mystic contemplation which quite 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 35 


ignored ‘‘obedience’’ (John iii, 36; xiv, 15) to Jesus’ 
commandments to serve others. On the other hand, an- 
other group, led by the ‘‘spirit’’ to an opposite pole, 
allowed themselves all sorts of personal indulgence, point- 
ing in justification to Paul’s teaching that for the Christian 
there is no law (Gal. v, 18). While John felt that there 
was room in the Church for wide divergence of opinion, 
he saw the need was general of forming the acquaintance 
of the historic Jesus and his ‘‘new’’ commandment as a 
corrective influence. We may expect to find, then, a large 
amount of Pauline thought in the Gospel of John and 
of developments of Pauline thought along the lines of 
the mystery religions and Gnostic philosophy; but we 
shall also find John skillfully introducing a generous meas- 
ure of salient incidents in his earthly life in order to plead 
for a personal loyalty to Jesus and his ‘‘new’’ command- 
ment as the safest basis of the new ‘‘life.’’ 

7. A seventh characteristic is its hostility toward Gnos- 
ticism. Gnosticism or Gnostic Christianity laid an empha- 
sis upon the deity of Christ that took all the reality out 
of his life and death. The humanity of Jesus dropped 
out of sight in the theological teaching of the relation that 
he was said to sustain to God. Later Gnostics, of whom 
Marcion is a good example, held that the Son of God born 
in Nazareth was not a babe really, but a full-grown man 
descended from heaven, and that he felt no real pain 
upon the cross because his humanity from the day of his 
birth was only an appearance. 

Gnosticism was an atmosphere rather than a separate in- 
stitution in Ephesus. Many of its elements were indigenous 
in Greek civilization. Some of these were fundamental 
to the Greek way of thinking and could not be changed. 
The author’s purpose was not to combat or destroy Gnos- 
ticism, but to modify and enrich it by inducing it to take 
up into itself a powerful realization of the humanity of 
Jesus and of the actuality of his suffering. In reading the 
Gospel, it is well not to be misled by the author’s tacit 


36 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


acceptance of teachings that were indispensable to Greek 
thinking which have no bearing on his main purpose. 

As the author is himself a Hellenist it is natural to find 
him adopting the dualistic conception of the relation of 
God and man, adopting also the sharp contrast between 
the earthly man and the spiritual, between the children 
of darkness and the children of light. These ideas he 
shared with Gnosticism. On the other hand, John’s Gospel 
is full of passages which reflect and assert the full hu- 
manity of Jesus. The force of these passages can be 
fully understood only when the Gnostics among the au- 
thor’s audience are kept in mind. John insists that Jesus 
was of Nazareth, of the family of Joseph (i, 45), a state- 
ment that would be anathema to a Gnostic. He narrates 
that ‘‘ Jesus wept’’ (John xi, 35). More than once he says 
that Jesus ‘‘groaned in his spirit’’ (xi, 33) or that his 
‘soul was troubled’’ (xii, 27; xiii, 21). 

8. The author’s attitude toward apocalyptic ideas of the 
second coming of Jesus is worthy of careful study. No 
Christian leader ever used more tact or showed a wiser 
spirit in handling this subject than John. As in the case 
of Gnosticism, so here he was waging no polemic. He 
never explicitly denies any feature of the current Apoca- 
lypticism. It is evident that many in his audience put 
their faith in literal fulfillment of Jewish Messianic prophe- 
cies. Others who were more Greek in thought found diffi- 
eulty with these prophecies. The author makes no claim 
to know the future. What he does is to try to induce 
them all to take up into their apocalyptic ideas of the 
second coming a spiritual meaning immediately useful and 
usable. ‘To those who insist that there is a terrible Day 
of Judgment coming when the wicked on the earth shall be 
destroyed by the ‘‘wrath of God’’ (ili, 36), he says, ‘‘ This 
is the judgment, that light has come into the world, and 
men have loved darkness rather than the light’’ (iii, 19). 
Again when he says, ‘‘The hour is coming, and that hour 
is already here, when the dead shall hear the voice of the 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 37 


Son of God (v, 25), he means the spiritually dead. He 
who believes ‘‘has passed out of death into life’’ (v, 24). 

9. John’s idea of the Church is peculiar to his Gospel. 
The confusion of religions and philosophies in Ephesus led 
its adopted citizen to see the need of a unified Christianity. 
John wished, as we have said before, to inject into the 
situation the ballast and steadying power that he was sure 
would accompany a realization of the historic Jesus. His 
peculiar idea of the Church is in line with this purpose. 
Jesus had surrounded himself with a group of disciples 
who helped him in his work. John felt that the true 
Church was a company of disciples who continue to keep 
that same fellowship with each other in Jesus alive in the 
world. All Jesus asked of his disciples was that they 
should take up his eross and help him bear the burden 
of establishing the Kingdom of God in the hearts of men. 
In contrast to the loosely knit and largely unorganized 
groups of disciples who formed the communities of Paul’s 
converts waiting for the Coming of the Lord, John gave 
to Christianity a conception of Church fellowship that 
made the early Christian communities the admiration and 
the envy of the pagan world. 

In the Gospel of John the Church is not a company 
made up of those who all hold the same beliefs. It is a 
company made up of those who keep Jesus’ ‘‘command- 
ments’’ (xv, 10) and are thus related to him as the 
branches to the vine. This group of disciples are sharply 
distinguishable from the rest of the world. For they 
have responded lavishly to his message to love one another. 
This close linking of Christians to one another in loyal dis- 
cipleship to their historic master gave Christianity great 
superiority in prestige over Judaism and the mystery re- 
ligions and Stoic philosophies, which also taught a higher 
life that they were unable to objectify for lack of the per- 
sonal loyalty to Jesus which gave to John’s Christians their 
peculiar consciousness of solidarity and unity. 

10. The prominence of the three words, Light, Life 


38 Tue GOSPEL OF JOHN 


and Belief in him, or Loyalty, constitutes another feature 
of the Gospel of John. ‘‘Light’’ was a word with a long 
history and many associations, particularly in Gnosticism 
and other Hellenistic philosophies. It was in common 
use as a symbol signifying knowledge, particularly knowl- 
edge of God. Besides a simpler there was also a more 
philosophic use of the term. In the more philosophic 
sense the light of knowledge was conceived as an actual 
presence and active influence at work in the world dis- 
pelling darkness of mind and illuminating the lives of 
men. Scott says: ‘‘To the Greek mind the highest good 
was identified with perfect knowledge; and for more than 
five centuries the great philosophers had been striving 
after that knowledge. It was assumed that the ‘wise man’ 
—the man who rightly apprehended the nature of God— 
would raise himself above earthly circumstances, and 
become, in some measure, like God.’’? 

John finds both the simpler and the more philosophic 
use suited to his purpose of conveying to his audience 
the significance of the historical Jesus. Jesus is ‘‘the Light 
of the World’’ (viii, 12; ix, 5). In the simpler Pales- 
tinian sense Jesus enlightens us by adding to our store of 
the knowledge of God and God’s purpose in the world. 
John had seen the presence of God in the beauty of Jesus’ 
life of love and beneficence. But the word is also used 
in John’s Gospel in the more philosophic Greek sense of 
‘‘light’’ as a higher, living influence, powerful enough to 
elevate men’s lives and fortunes. John knew this more 
philosophic idea was in everyday use among his people. 
He put Jesus into their thought-world by making the bold 
claim that in Jesus we see the incarnation of this cosmic 
light whose mission is to ennoble the lives of men and 
guide their destinies. 

How this more philosophic Greek idea of the function 
of light works out might be paraphrased in modern terms 
somewhat thus: The light of knowledge is diffused through 

2 Hist. and Rel. Value, p. 46. 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 39 


humanity and works on human nature in as direct and 
definite a way as the rays of the sun work upon plant 
life. A plant cannot grow and blossom without light. A 
sick person is benefited by sunshine. The human spirit 
is sick and dwarfed until it submits itself to the life-giving, 
health-giving rays of the light of true knowledge. The 
light of knowledge has been in the world from the ‘‘begin- 
ning’’ lighting ‘‘every man’’ (John i, 2,9). But in Jesus 
the light came close to men, focussed with such brillianey 
and radiating its power and vitality with such force as to 
make him the Savior of the world. 

The significance of John’s identification of the infectious 
quality of the personal life of Jesus with the Greek cosmic 
light principle is that the combination resulted in a gospel 
which met the approval and won the allegiance both of 
simple people and of the philosophically or scientifically 
minded. It universalized and internationalized the life 
of Jesus as triumphantly as did Paul, but, unlike Paul, it 
preserved the conerete example of his earthly life and 
emphasized its office. Jesus’ life became crammed with 
meaning as a revelation of what the life-giving, health- 
giving rays of the light of true knowledge when given full 
right of way could do in, and for, and with our human 
nature. 

11. The second of the three vital words of John’s Gospel 
is ‘‘Life.’’ ‘‘Life’’ almost never means to Jéhn mere 
physical life, but is practically always used in a larger 
sense; and in this larger sense, as in the case of the word 
‘‘light,’’ it always has two distinct aspects, a simpler, Pal- 
estinian and a more scientific or philosophic, Greek one. 
The purpose of John’s Gospel, as stated in xx, 31, is that 
through believing men may have “‘life.’’ 

The simpler use of the term is based directly upon the 
Palestinian point of view of Jesus as master and his dis- 
ciples as students. In Jesus’ day the Jews had concen- 
trated their dreams of God’s highest blessings in the 
thought of the Messianic Age to come. The life of the 


40 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


‘age to come,’’ 2.4. ‘‘eternal life,’’ was the greatest hope 
of every individual (Mar. x, 17, 30). John drops the 
Jewish conception of a coming Kingdom largely, but retains 
‘‘eternal life’’ and energizes it by bringing it down to 
earth from the clouds. He will have it that the new store 
of knowledge of God which his students gain from Jesus 
puts the possession of ‘‘eternal life’’ here and now within 
their grasp. 

Here again Paul supplies the missing link between the 
simpler, Palestinian and the developed philosophic, Greek 
use of the term ‘‘life.’’ Paul put great emphasis upon 
the power of the Spirit in regenerating believers. He felt 
that the indwelling Spirit was a token and ‘‘first install- 
ment’’ of that future life of the Kingdom (II Cor., i, 22; 
v, 5; Eph., i, 14). John goes a step farther and says 
that the present life in the Spirit is life at its highest, and 
that the future life is no more than a consequence and 
natural prolongation of it. ‘‘Life,’’ then, for John means 
a, life lived in accordance with the principles of the King- 
dom laid down by Jesus, and might be described as the 
life of the Kingdom lived in the present. 

This becomes for John the bond with Palestine for the 
other more philosophic significance of the word current 
in Greek thought. The Greeks thought of the material as 
base, and entanglement in it a eaptivity. Parallel with 
the world of material is the principle of energy or life 
which animates all things. God is the supreme influence 
above all material things. The supreme good is attained 
by putting oneself into spiritual contact with the Source 
of all life. A man thus receives the ‘‘fullness’’ of life 
which rescues him from all the petty entanglements of 
physical existence. He enters into a sort of divine life 
in union with the divine Spirit. 

Such idealistic communion with God was extremely diffi- 
cult, John says, until Christ came. But he makes easier 
the establishment of this contact with the Life that is above 
life. In him we have the essence of God in fleshly form, 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 41 


so that in discipleship to him we enter, as it were, through 
an open ‘‘door’’ (x, 7) into the divine life. His life is 
an object lesson to us in the way to let the divine life 
infiltrate into human existence. Men now “‘have no excuse’’ 
(xv, 22). Any man or woman for all time can enter into 
close communion with God and receive the power to live 
the life eternal. 

This Greek contribution to the term ‘‘Life’’ might per- 
haps be paraphrased in modern ideas as follows: Any 
one who looks at magnificent mountain scenery feels a cer- 
tain response in his nature. A man who on a clear summer 
night gazes long and earnestly into the heavens and tries 
to lose himself among the stars feels a certain sense of 
uplift which helps him bear the burden of the day. This 
is because man’s soul tends upward. If freed for a while 
from its physical prison it rejoices and gains new strength. 
This is the explanation of the power of Jesus. In the 
midst of most limiting circumstances his spirit rejoiced in 
a freedom and fullness of life. All men know that the 
natural man goes \through life teased, tormented and more 
or less depressed all the time by a prisoner-like sense that 
his life thus far has been a helpless captivity. The longing 
to escape is eating out his heart. The sort of divine life 
that would result from union with the divine Spirit is 
the only way out for us from our entanglement in the 
material, said the Greek, but how to find it we do not seem 
to know, for few of us do. In Jesus, John said to them, 
I will show you the way out. He and God were never 
far apart. He was the incarnation of this free and full 
life. By entering into communion with him any man or 
woman of you may appropriate and assimilate this spirit 
of freedom and of victory and make it your own. 

John’s contribution to the spread of Christianity through 
the world consisted in thus linking together a Palestinian 
and a Greek way of stating the Christian way of salvation 
or emancipation from the material so as to express with 
double power the significance of Jesus. It gave the Chris- 


42 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tian gospel a cosmic and scientific basis in present life. 
It universalized its appeal. Every one wishes life, more 
abundant life. It is the great consuming desire of human- 
ity. John proclaims to every one: In him is Life. 

12. The third of the three great Johannine words is 
‘‘Believe on (in) him.’’ ‘‘To believe in’’ Jesus is the high 
road to the new way of Life. ‘‘To believe in’’ him in 
the Gospel of John means to let down the bars that stand 
between us and close personal fellowship with him, in 
particular to open our hearts to receive his spirit and to 
obey his commands. Here again the word is used in two 
ways. Here again John splices the importance of direct. 
discipleship to Jesus with the speculative Christianity of 
Ephesus. 

In the simpler sense John appeals for the same kind 
of belief in Jesus as was shown by his first disciples. Belief 
in him closed the circuit between them and influences by 
which their lives were transformed; for his spirit entered 
into them and enabled them to become imitators of him. 
Their fellowship with him was the source of their Life. 
John preaches to the natural man everywhere that the 
way out of his helpless captivity is this same fellowship 
to which belief in Jesus leads. By dwelling on his deeds 
and meditating on his words and communion with his 
spirit, any man may “‘believe on him’’ and reap the same 
harvest of life which blessed the first disciples. 

On the other hand, this relationship may be thought of 
in another way as one which was very natural to the 
people of Ephesus. For centuries the Greeks had been 
accustomed to think that a divine spirit or power actually 
enters into human beings under certain conditions, causing 
some to dance sacred dances, others to utter oracles, others 
to reveal divine truths. This general notion had sobered 
down in the religions of the first century into a practice 
of performing certain rites and ceremonies to encourage 
the entrance of a, or the, divine spirit into the hearts of 
communicants. But this indwelling force or spiritual es- 


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 43 


sence was still conceived as in a very realistic sense giving 
its possessor the victory. 

With this background to work from it was not hard 
for John to explain what followed the entrance of the 
Christian Spirit into the hearts of believers. The Spirit 
changes, cleanses, ennobles, regenerates. The Spirit makes 
us children of God, not merely by an act of God in our 
birth, but by an act of our own. It is only a matter of 
opening the door of the soul, but the Spirit cannot enter 
while that door remains shut. This is what it means to 
‘‘bhelieve in’’ Jesus. It is to put ourselves into touch with 
influences powerful enough to overcome all the obstacles to 
loyalty to Jesus, through ‘‘knowing’’ him personally and 
through obedience to his ‘‘commandments.’’ 

This more concrete and workable view of the union of 
Christ and the believer might be paraphrased in modern 
terms with the loss of only a small part of its realism, 
as follows: By personal contact with Jesus his immediate 
disciples were played upon by invisible forces which im- 
parted to them his higher life. They, in turn, persuaded 
others who received the same new power of life. We are 
a part of the unbroken succession. We all receive life and 
nourishment from him as truly as the branches of a grape- 
vine receive their vitality from the stalk to which they 
are joined (xv, 1). It is impossible to remain in close 
contact with him long without being affected by it. Any 
one who has a note or chord of mysticism in his nature 
will find this beautifully expressed in Emerson’s essay on 
‘The Oversoul.’’ 

The relation of the three ideas of Light, Life and Belief 
in him may be expressed by saying that Jesus is the 
Sun (Mal. iv, 2) whose rays bring Life and Health to 
those who come out of the dark into his light. He is the 
Light, in whom we have Life, through loyalty to him. 

All these twelve characteristics combine to show that 
John sought to universalize the principle that power unto 
salvation is only to be found in the fellowship of Jesus. 


44 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


He linked up Christianity more closely with the ministry 
of Jesus than any other religion has ever been linked to 
the career of its founder. He set forth the life of Jesus 
of Galilee in terms of lasting significance. He was one of 
the last men in the world able to do this because he wrote 
just at the time the Christian religion was entering an 
era in which there would be no one to say that he had 
known Jesus. John made it forever impossible for a specu- 
lative Christianity which left those days in Palestine en- 
tirely out like the one he found active in Ephesus, to live 
again anywhere in the world. He could not make the lan- 
cuage of the Galilean gospel with its Messiah and Messi- 
anie Kingdom and Apocalyptic Coming understood in his 
non-Jewish environment. John, therefore, made the term 
Messiah mean Son of God. He made the Kingdom a pres- 
ent spiritual brotherhood, he interpreted apocalyptic 
imagery so that it had a present meaning. His re-statement 
of the Christian gospel appealed to every class and race 
and type. He proclaimed that the opportunity for life 
eternal which was given to men through Jesus was not 
given once for all, but is a continuous gift, open from age 
to age to any man anywhere who will believe in him. 


CHAPTER III 
THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 


1. The key to the literary style of the Gospel of John 
has been secured in recent years from the study of papyrus 
documents of the same general period. Hundreds upon 
hundreds of ancient documents have been discovered, in- 
eluding large numbers of private letters of common folks 
of the first century which reveal to us the colloquial lan- 
guage of the people of the time. The New Testament and, 
in particular, the Gospel of John are full of peculiarities 
of style not found in classical or in any distinctly literary 
Greek. This peculiar Greek of John’s Gospel used to be 
accounted for as the result of the attempt of a Jew (John) 
to write the Greek language. But probability now leans 
decidedly in the direction of recognizing as colloquial most 
of the expressions which used to be explained as Hebraistic. 

An outstanding example of what we mean is the fre- 
quent use of the paratactic form of sentence with its con- 
stant repetition of the word ‘‘and.’’ In every part of the 
Gospel we find this frequent use of ‘‘And...and... 
and,’’ familiar to us, also in our own American colloquial 
style of narrative. Who of us tells a story orally without 
using the word ‘‘and’’ more times than he would use it in 
writing the same story? 

Deissmann gives us many examples of this ‘‘and’’ style 
from the papyri. A complaint to a judge (originally oral) 
reads as follows: ‘‘Yesterday as we were returning at 
dawn from Theadelphia two bandits fell on us and bound 
us and the watchman and struck us several times and 
wounded Pasion and took a pig from us and stole Pasion’s 

1Light from the Amcient East, chap. II, 3, EB. 

45 


46 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


coat and. ..’’ Another example is taken from one of 


several healing accounts found on a marble tablet in Rome. 
We can almost hear the man telling of his cure: ‘‘To 
Valerius Aper a blind soldier the god gave direction to 
go and take blood from a white rooster mixed with honey 
and to mix a salve and to anoint his eyes for three days 
and he could see again and came and gave thanks publicly 
to the god.’’ 

Compare the repetiton of ‘‘and’’ in John ix, 11. ‘‘He 
answered, The man who is ealled Jesus made clay and 
anointed my eyes and said to me, Go to Siloam and wash: 
When I went and washed I received sight. And . . .’’ Com- 
pare also the preceding verses, John ix, 6, 7. This ‘‘and”’ 
style appears in every chapter of the Gospel. Even in 
the prologue, sometimes considered formal and philosoph- 
ical, we find the same usage: ‘‘In him was life; and the 
life was the light of men. And light shines in the dark- 
ness; and the darkness has never overcome it’’ (i, 4, 5). 

The impression that the contents of this Gospel were 
spoken before being published, and were written down 
pretty much as spoken, is strengthened by many other 
observations. 

There are numerous usages of single words shown by 
the papyri to belong to popular dialect but not found in 
literary Greek, which are employed by John in his Gospel. 
One such usage is represented by the expression ‘‘full’’ in 
i, 14. This word is in the nominative or subjective case, 
where literary syntax would call for the objective case. 
But in the colloquial style the word is treated as inde- 
clinable just as John has it.” Another usage is repre- 
sented by the example, ‘‘own’’ in i, 41. This is a perfect 
instance of colloquial tautology. John meant no such em- 
phasis upon the word ‘‘own’’ as all the older commen- 
tators felt must be present. The usage has been clearly 
shown to be a bit of popular dialect (See comments on the 
passage in this volume). 

*Deissmann, chap. II 3, D. 


THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 47 


Again, the frequent and rapid change of tense in narra- 
tive, together with the constant use of the historical pres- 
ent, is another indication of informal spoken presentation 
as distinguished from literary exactness: ‘‘It was about 
noon. There comes a woman of Samaria’’ (iv. 6, 7). In 
the sections of text given in this volume the alternation 
of tenses is preserved at the expense of smoothness, in 
order to give the right impression of the author’s graphic 
style. 

2. In addition to the popular style in word and syntax 
there is the conversational form of the narrative. There 
is no other book of the New Testament where question and 
answer follow each other so extensively as in the scene of 
Nicodemus talking with Jesus at night, in the narrative 
of the woman at the well, and in the discussion concerning 
the bread of life. Many a modern book reader turns the 
pages of a new book to see how much of dialogue the 
pages contain. This conversation-style at times in John 
takes an almost dramatic turn. Always playing the part 
of objectors, ‘‘the Jews’’ appear at opportune moments 
when the author wishes to explain to his audience more 
in detail the significance of a saying or deed of Jesus. 
When Jesus says (vi, 41) I am the bread that has come 
down out of heaven, the ‘‘Jews’’ object (42), Is he not 
Joseph’s son? Again a few verses later the ‘‘Jews’’ ask, 
How can he give us his flesh to eat (52)? The author thus 
avoids implying that his audience is dull and at the same 
time he ean introduce explanations suited to even the most 
simple-minded. (See remarks concerning ‘‘the Jews’’ in 
our preceding chapter.) The Gospel, in other words, is the 
work of a public speaker making a popular appeal. 

3. In line with the interest of the author in the dra- 
matic is his fondness for contrasts. There is little twilight 
in the Gospel. But there is much light, and there is much 
darkness. There is life, and there is death. There are 
love and hate, truth and falsehood. There are the children 
of God and the children of the Devil (viii, 44). There 


48 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


is the spirit over against the flesh. There are righteous- 
ness and sin, the old commandment and the new command- 
ment, and many other alternatives, which show how fond 
the author is of sharp-cut, vigorous, popular description 
and appeal. Moreover, these contrasts all find a place in 
the daily life of the people. The author uses no recondite 
categories, for every man or woman is sensible of the terror 
of darkness and the joy of light, of the beauty of love 
and the meanness of hate, of the coldness of death and of 
the glow of abundant vitality. 

4. One of the chief problems of the Gospel is what has 
come to be named the ‘‘I’’ style. Deissmann describes this 
at considerable length as one of the main features deter- 
minative of the literary character of the Gospel. He gives 
examples, some of which will be noted in our comments 
on the tenth chapter of the Gospel. Suffice it to say here 
that a peculiar use of the pronoun ‘‘I’’ in religious papyri 
and inscriptions was widespread and popular. When John 
represents Jesus as saying, ‘‘I am the good shepherd,”’ 
the ‘‘I’’ form he uses is as much in line with the natural 
religious language of the people whom he is addressing 
as the ‘‘he’’ form would be for a preacher today who would 
say in a similar connection, ‘‘He is the good shepherd.’’ 
Yet the interesting fact is that in Ephesus the people would 
hot understand John as claiming that Jesus spoke Greek 
or that he had ever said these exact words concerning 
himself which John was saying concerning him. 

Take a modern example of an audience listening to 
Shakespeare’s presentation of Julius Cesar. Cesar is 
represented as speaking certain words in his own person. 
The audience understands the dramatic atmosphere and 
is not misled into taking them to be a historical report. 
This does not give an accurate idea, however, of John’s 
situation; for when John puts the words, ‘‘I am the good 
shepherd,’’ into the mouth of Jesus, it is a direct con- 
fession or declaration of faith on the part of speaker and 
listeners that to and for them, he zs the good shepherd. 


THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 49 


This is the correct interpretation of the use of the ‘‘I’’ 
style in popular language in Ephesus. 

A very close religious parallel in modern times is our 
specialized use of ‘‘thee’’ and ‘‘thou.’’ The use of these 
archaic forms does not mean that the user has studied old 
English. It is a popular, religious custom. Any Church 
officer or Christian leader is able to drop naturally into 
the use of ‘‘thee’’ and ‘‘thou,’’ and when the listeners 
hear these words they instinctively know that a prayer 
has begun. So in Ephesus, when they heard John use the 
pronoun ‘‘I’’ in statements concerning Jesus, like, ‘‘I am 
the good shepherd,’’ his listeners knew that his words rep- 
resented a confession of his own personal faith. To repro- 
duce a part of the ancient effect it is only necessary to 
substitute ‘‘Thou art’’ for ‘‘I am’’ in a reverent tone in 
the modern reading at every occurrence of the words. 
Examples of this substitution are given in our comments 
on John x. This employment of a usage shown to be in 
line with popular, religious custom in Ephesus is another 
evidence of the popular character of the Gospel. 

5. Other evidences of a popular style are translations, 
repetitions and cross references. Translations of Hebrew 
and Aramaic terms are frequent. If this Gospel were a 
theological treatise it would seem strange to find the 
author pausing to translate such simple words as Rabbi 
(i, 38) and Messiah (i, 41) and Cephas (i, 42). Such 
aid to the reader points to the presence of a general audi- 
ence. Such solicitude on the part of the author indicates 
an almost affectionate, personal approach and not the for- 
malities of a technical theological discussion. 

Repetitions are numerous. The assertion that John the 
Baptist was ‘‘not the Christ’’ occurs in i, 20; 1, 25 (cf., i, 8) 
and again in iii, 28. That Jesus is “‘the Light of the 
World”’ is stated in vili, 12, again in ix, 5. Often they 
occur in rapid succession within a few verses as in vi, 53-58, 
or serve merely to recall another narrative, as in the case 
of ‘‘the Lamb of God’’ (i, 29, and i, 836). Such repetitions 


50 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


would be out of place anywhere else than in rather simple 
and direct appeal. 

. Cross references also show the author’s close relation 
to his audience. ‘‘John was not yet cast into prison’”’ 
(ii, 24). The statement is of the nature of an aside only 
possible where author and audience are on a particularly 
close and friendly footing. Where the Gospel facts were 
familiar to all parties concerned, such a remark strengthens 
an author’s sympathetic mental and spiritual contact with 
his hearers. How grateful the ordinary reader is for such 
a compliment to his intelligence as in xix, 39, ‘‘ And there 
came also Nicodemus, he who at the first came to him by 
night.’’? The Gospel is full of such cross references which 
have no necessary place that emphasize the popular style 
and point of view. They have all helped to make this 
Gospel the most readable and probably the most loved of 
all the Gospels. 

6. The attitude of the Gospel toward theology and doc- 
trine ought not to be hard now to discover. It has been 
customary to say that we must understand the author as 
‘‘writing as he does with an express theological intention,’’ 
or that the supreme purpose of the Fourth Gospel was the 
re-statement of the ‘‘complete system’’ of Christian doc- 
trine in terms of Hellenistic philosophy. There is a grain 
of truth in these, as in most statements. The Fourth 
Gospel has its theology; and the author is a Hellenist. It 
does not follow, however, that the Gospel is a treatise on 
Hellenistic theology. 

The author of the Fourth Gospel was under the control, 
like Jesus, his master, of an immediate, practical purpose. 
His purpose was that his hearers might ‘‘have life’’ (xx, 
31). He has little patience with teachers who do not 
understand the power of the Spirit. Satire against learn- 
ing of a certain sort crops out here and there. ‘‘Are you 
teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?’’ 
(iii, 10.) ‘‘How does this man have such learning when 
he has never studied?’’ (vii, 15.) We may imagine 


THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 51 


John in full sympathy with Paul in his saying that the 
gospel may be foolishness to philosophers but to those who 
are saved by it, it is the power of God unto life (I Cor. 
115-21). 

Indeed, there is warrant for the statement that John 
refused to have anything to do with doctrine as doctrine. 
His supreme purpose is to bring men and women within 
the scope of the influences that will make them disciples 
of Jesus, and by entrance into fellowship with him experi- 
ence the joy and power of the new Life. Was Jesus 
human or divine? John’s answer might be said to be that 
he was both. If the emphasis is to be put on either side, 
the need just then in Ephesus in his judgment is to put it 
upon the reality of Jesus’ earthly career. We have noted 
in the previous chapter the anti-Gnostie and anti-Docetic 
quality of the Gospel. Again, if John were to be asked 
‘‘Is God a person or spirit?’’ his answer would be that 
God is Spirit (iv, 24; i, 18), but that through Jesus we 
may enter into personal relationship with him (xiv, 9-10; 
x, 30). Or, if John were asked whether he regarded the 
miracles as the basis of belief in Jesus, he would answer 
that as symbols of eternal spiritual truths of Christian 
experience, the miracles are ‘‘signs’’ of his power as 
Savior. 

Again, concerning the question of the second coming 
and the judgment day, John’s interest is not in any dog- 
matic statement pertaining to a more or less distant future, 
but in a present enrichment of life to which they may 
contribute through an awakening and exaltation of be- 
lievers. See comments on v, 24-25; ii, 19. We can imag- 
ine Paul and James confronting John and asking, ‘‘Is sal- 
vation by faith or by works?’’ (Gal. iii, 6-9; ef. James ii, 
21, 24.) John’s answer is that ‘‘belief in him’’ puts a 
man in touch with the divine aid that enables him in loyalty 
to Jesus to do his commandments; so that the two become 
practically identical. It is through knowledge gained in 
personal discipleship that we attain the life which is sal- 


52 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


vation. Is salvation, then, present or future? John’s 
answer is that we enter now into eternal life and begin 
at once a heavenly existence that is never to end (v. 24). 

To say that the Gospel of John is theological in purpose 
and point of view is not the whole truth. It is hardly a 
half truth. It should be supplemented by an emphatic 
statement that the author was far more consumed with 
zeal for the saving of the souls of the men and women of 
Ephesus, than for the construction of an elaborate and 
precise theology. Direct appeals to Christian living, ap- 
peals stated not in terms of any ‘‘theology,’’ but in the 
simple words of their own daily thinking and living, reveal 
his heart’s desire. 

7. John thus preferred to express his message in con- 
erete terms taken from the life of Ephesus and from the 
familiar parts of the Old Testament. His message, as 
stated before, was that ‘‘belief in him’’ obtains for any 
man the Light of true knowledge which enables him to 
live the Life more abundant. These are words of every- 
day living, Light, Life, Belief in him. 

In bringing home this message to his people John used 
simple illustrations. He describes a wedding scene (John 
11) and a birth (John ii); he talks about the best kind 
of water for drinking (John iv), the best food for eating 
(John vi), the cure for blindness (John ix). His use of 
these as symbols of spiritual truth was even more readily 
understood in those days than in modern times. 

An American monthly magazine, near the top of the 
list in number of copies sold, which never mentions religion 
or has any religious or moral interest, constantly addresses 
talks to its readers like the following: ‘‘Many of the 
readers of this publication have written us, after having 
put into practice some of our principles, that their experi- 
ence was like being born again. They were actually born 
into a new life, physically and mentally everything was 
different. They became broader, more capable, more stable. 
They had come out of a narrowed existence into the full- 


THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 53 


ness of life... . There are various degrees of life. Many 
people are practically dead, many years before they reach 
their last resting place.... If you have been living the 
old life, hampered by the conventional principles, come 
out into the sunshine... then life will mean something. 
It will be full to the very brim every day. You will be 
spurred on to do your best work. You will be stimulated 
at times almost to the point of intoxication.... If you 
would be born again into this new life, give our principles 
a trial.... Try it and be convinced.’’ Birth, new life, 
fullness of life, death, resting place, tomb, sunshine, light, 
intoxication are all words of popular daily experience. 
They are all used directly or indirectly by John. ‘‘Try it 
and be convinced’’ parallels John’s repeated ‘‘Come and 
see’’ (i, 39, and elsewhere). 

8. The catacombs of Rome show the extent of the pop- 
ularity of John’s pictures. A book by C. D. Lamberton 
entitled ‘‘Themes from St. John’s Gospel in Early Roman 
Catacomb Painting’’ divides the themes treated into three 
classes. The first list, which is made up of the pictures 
based upon narratives found only in John’s Gospel, in- 
cludes the Raising of Lazarus, which heads the whole list; 
second, the Woman of Samaria; third, the Marriage at 
Cana. The second classification is made up of pictures 
which are found both in John and elsewhere in Scripture. 
Among these are the Healing of the Paralytic, the Lamb of 
God, the Breakfast by the Sea. Certain details in these 
pictures, however, show that John has been followed rather 
than other Scripture. In a third classification is a con- 
siderable list of pictures ‘‘characteristically Johannine,’’ 
The Eucharist (in connection with the Feeding of the 
Multitude), the Baptism, the Vine and Branches, the Good 
Shepherd, the Living Water, and others. ‘‘St. John’s 
Gospel,’’ says Lamberton, ‘‘was the leading factor in the 
entire field of catacomb symbolism’’ (p. 101). 

9. Another bit of evidence to show that the Gospel of 
John is thus composed of religious appeals expressed in 


54 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


popular language and illustration is the fact they may 
be called and have been called ‘‘sermons’’ (Burton, Short 
Introduction to the Gospels, p. 128). Each chapter in 
the first part of the Gospel is suggestive of a separate 
sermon. The chapters do not form logical parts of a 
single discussion, but stand related to each other only 
as a series of religious talks might be related. The order 
of the sermons is determined by the nature of their sub- 
jects rather than by chronological sequence of citation 
from Jesus’ ministry. To read one of these religious ap- 
peals understandingly it 1s necessary to imagine that you 
are hearing it preached to an Ephesian audience, and 
that the main message of the talk is all that you can expect 
to capture and retain. 

For it is quite apparent that we do not have the sermons 
complete. As it takes only three to five minutes to read 
the words, they can form no more than the framework of 
an entire discourse. It is perhaps too venturesome to 
try to understand the exact relation of the written Gospel 
to the oral addresses. Yet, as a working basis, each chapter 
may be treated as the set of notes which the author pre- 
pared in advance of the delivery of the talk. Taken even 
as notes they are extremely abbreviated, the bare sugges- 
tions of the symbols and explanations which the author 
in speaking would give at considerable length. <A good 
example of what we mean is the sentence, ‘‘He spoke of 
the temple of his body’’ (11, 21). 

Probably the author had been preaching many years in 
Ephesus before the idea occurred to him of collecting 
these sermons into a single scroll or book. Toward the 
close of his ministry when he sorted out the material that 
could be crowded within the limits of one book, there was 
not room enough to reproduce complete sermons and he 
had to content himself with a few touches which would 
give a certain coherence and smoothness to the work as a 
whole. The collection was not widely circulated until the 
death of the author, at which time the appendix was added 


THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 55 


by the editor who prepared the whole work for general 
use. 

The order in which the sermons follow one another pre- 
sents a problem which has never been satisfactorily solved. 
One explanation offered is that the leaves of the Gospel 
were picked up after they had been blown about and dis- 
arranged by some accident in the early days and the pres- 
ent order is thus largely the result of chance! Possibly to 
regard the order in which they appear as an order logical 
enough for a series of sermon subjects furnishes a solution. 
After the introductory chapter comes the sermon on mar- 
riage (chap. ii) ; second, the sermon on birth (chap. iii) ; 
third, on water to drink (chap. iv) ; fourth, on sickness and 
health (chap. v); fifth, on food to eat (chap. vi); sixth, 
on blindness and its cure. More will be said concerning 
the order of this material in our comments on the various 
chapters. Suffice it to say here that if the Gospel is made 
up of sermons we may expect to find each chapter or section 
in the main an independent unit. 

10. These sermons originally preached by John in Ephe- 
sus have become the most popular and most widely read 
religious literature in the world. The walls of the cata- 
combs tell the story of their appeal in the ancient day. 
The place of the Beloved Disciple and of the principal 
scenes of the Gospel in the history of painting and of 
sculpture continues the story. Quotations from it in use 
on every hand tell us daily the same thing. 

Letters of inquiry were recently sent to a wide circle 
of Christian leaders. Ministers in large churches and in 
small showed a fine spirit of codperation in presenting to 
their people, old and young, the questions submitted. 
**Which of the books of the New Testament do you love 
best?’’ ‘Which of the gospels do you find most helpful?’’ 
Answers to the questions concerning the gospels that num- 
bered twenty-five per cent of the total in favor of John 
would mean that the Fourth Gospel is as popular as any 
one of the other three. But the returns showed the aston- 


56 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ishingly large percentage of about ninety in favor of the 
Gospel of John as the most helpful and widely read and 
best liked of the books of the New Testament. 

Contrast with this the fact that there is no recent English 
commentary on the Gospel of John, none which brings to 
bear on its interpretation the great volume of modern schol- 
arly discovery and historical reconstruction. How is it that 
so many college men even feel that they can well afford 
to go without any modern information on the Christian 
Testament. Not long ago a college graduate in the midst 
of his seminary course was advised to take up the study 
of John. His exact reply was: ‘‘I have never ventured 
very far into the metaphysics of the Fourth Gospel and I: 
do not care to do so now.’’ An educated man ought to see 
in the spectacle of the love of millions of people for the 
Gospel of John a fact of overwhelming significance. Only 
fundamental value in a book can account for such popular 
favor. 

Amid the theological disturbances of recent years the 
slogan ‘‘Back to Jesus’’ has met with wide acceptance 
among historically trained religious leaders. The slogan is 
a good one, but like any good slogan carelessly employed 
may prove misleading. There can be no dispute that Mark 
is the earliest and John the latest gospel. If chronological 
precedence is to decide, according to the slogan, then Mark 
takes first place and John last place. In the coming years, 
however, Jesus’ words may again be fulfilled, that the 
first shall be last and the last first, if Christianity continues 
to be a religion of the people, and the Gospel a part of the 
daily life of man. 

For the Gospel of John thus to come into its own, it 
must be read with an appreciation of its historical char- 
acter and quality by hosts of Christian people who are 
unable to do so today. The purpose of the following pages 
is to form a happy union between the historical spirit 
of inquiry and an appreciation of the beauty, power, and 
charm of the Fourth Gospel. 


CHAPTER IV 


THE PROLOGUE 
JOHN I, 1-18 


1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was 
with God, and the Word was divine. 2. The Word ex- 
isted in the beginning with God. 3. All things came into 
being through the Word, and nothing came to pass apart 
from him. 4. In him was life; and that life was the light 
of men. 5. The light is shining in the darkness, and the 
darkness has never overcome it. 

6. There came a man, sent from God, whose name was 
John. 7. He came as a witness, to bear witness to the 
light, in order that every one might believe. 

8. He was not the light, but came to bear witness to the 
light. 9. The real light which enlightens every man was 
coming into the world. 10. He was in the world, and 
though the world came into being through him, the world 
did not recognize him. 11. He came into his own world 
and his own kin did not give him a welcome. 12. But to 
all who did receive him and believe in him he gave the 
right to become children of God, 13. who owe their 
new birth not to nature or to human or physical impulse, 
but to God. 

14, The Word was embodied in a human life, and lived 
among us. And we saw the beauty and power of his life, 
the heritage of an only son from his father, full of appeal 
and conviction. 15. (John testified concerning him; 
John is the one who said: The Coming One, though he 
comes after me, is yet before me, for he was ever first.) 
16, For out of his abundance we have all received, bless- 

57 


58 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ing after blessing. 17. For while the law was given 
through Moses, blessing and truth came through Jesus 
Christ. 18. No one has ever seen God, but an only Son 
of the Father’s heart has revealed him to us. 


The first eighteen verses are related to the rest of the 
Gospel as a preface is to a book, and are a part of it in the 
sense that the opening bars that contain the composer’s 
theme are part of a musical production. Many a study 
of the Fourth Gospel in its treatment of the prologue gives 
an unwarrantedly peculiar impression of the book as a 
whole.” The Gospel really consists of a collection of talks 
or discourses expressed in simple graphic language for 
popular consumption. The prologue forms no part of the 
first talk nor of any other. 

The purpose of the prologue is to win the attention of 
a Greek reader to a gospel of Jewish origin. It is a bridge 
from Ephesus to Palestine. It connects two worlds of 
thought, the Occidental and the Oriental. The Greek 
believed that the universe is the result of an evolution. 
To be sure he did not reach that conclusion by the road 
of Darwin’s idea of the differentiation of species, nor did 
he dream that the world is a revolving sphere. But the 
ancient Greek did have his ideas of atoms and eyclie storms 
of whirling atoms out of which the world has come. In 
contrast, the Jew believed that Jehovah created the world 
by a gesture of his sovereign will. Again, the Greek’s 
conception of God was less personal than the Jew’s. The 
Jew believed that Jehovah personally directs human af- 
fairs, sends his angels to earth and his Messiah, and will 
one day overturn and change and reorganize the world. 
The proposal of the prologue is in general a very simple 
one. It concedes to the Greek his idea that God is an 
invisible spirit and then lays out its whole strength to per- 
suade him to concede that this invisible spirit entered into 
Jesus and through Jesus revealed a beneficent love as the 

1Cf. Gardner, p. 312, note. 


Ch. 1, 1-18 THE PROLOGUE 59 


highest principle of life and the inmost power within the 
wheels of the universe. 

This idea that the prologue makes concessions to and 
pleads for concessions from Greek popular philosophy is 
stated by Gardner as follows: ‘‘It is notable that the 
Evangelist brings in his sentences about the Logos as if 
he were stating something very simple and undisputed... . 
He takes for granted a scheme of philosophy at the time 
current at Ephesus.... The originality of the Evan- 
gelist (in the eyes of his Greek hearers) lies, not in a new 
theory of the Logos, but in his conception of the embodi- 
ment of the eternal Word in the person of the Founder 
of Christianity.’’* 

This proposition which the author puts forth, that the 
divine Spirit dwelt with all its fullness in Jesus, was 
particularly easy of apprehension for the Greek in the 
way in which our author states it because it fitted right 
into the framework of the accepted Stoic philosophy. This 
philosophy which was distantly related to Platonic dualism 
took the stand that every man has in him a spark of the 
divine Spirit which guides all things. According to it, man 
is the combination of two elements, the flesh and the 
divine reason implanted in him. Thus the announcement 
that Jesus was the incarnation of the divine Spirit in all 
its fullness would be readily understood in connection with 
the natural intellectual training and environment of the 
Greek. 

‘‘In the beginning was the Word’’ (i, 1). That the 
‘expression ‘‘Word’’ or ‘‘Logos’’ had not previously been 
used as a distinctively Christian term at the time this 
Gospel was written is evident from the fact that it does 
not occur anywhere else in this Gospel outside the pro- 
logue, nor anywhere else in the New Testament in this 
sense. The nearest parallel is the phrase ‘‘The word of 
God’’ in Revelation xix, 13 (cf., I John i, 1; Heb. iv, 12). 
It is, therefore, necessary to go outside the Christian re- 

2Pp. 314-316. 


60 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ligion to understand its meaning, into the popular philoso- 
phy of the period. His use of the expression must not 
be misconstrued to mean that the author of the Gospel 
was a philosopher or interested in metaphysics. The term 
was a popular one, just as ‘‘evolution”’ is today. It would 
be as much out of place to call a man a scientist because 
‘‘evolution’’ formed part of his vocabulary as it would be 
to call the Fourth Gospel philosophical or metaphysical 
because of the use of the term ‘‘ Word.”’ 

Light on what he means by the term will be thrown by 
a study of two lines of thought, the one represented by 
Heraclitus, Plato and the Stoics, the other represented by 
Philo. The philosophy of Heraclitus, to which Platonic 
dualism was somewhat related, became the basis of the most 
popular teaching in the first century, which was Stoicism. 
Early Greek philosophers (cf., also the later teaching of 
Epicurus) had explained the world as an aggregation and 
adaptation of physical elements, a purely materialistic 
basis. Heraclitus, a philosopher of Ephesus, the city where 
John’s Gospel was written, who lived about five centuries 
before Christ, argued that to the physical elements we must 
add an element of reason to explain the origin and prog- 
ress of the world truly. Plato and his followers later, in 
developing a somewhat similar idea, drew a sharp dis- 
tinction and cleavage between the physical realm and the 
reason or ideal, a doctrine which is now known as Platonie 
dualism. On the one hand was a world of material things 
distinct and inferior and separate. And on the other hand 
was a world of ideas and ideals equally distinet and su- 
perior and separate. This spirit world corresponded to 
the term ‘‘God.’’ But it was for Plato an absentee and 
not an immanent God indwelling in men, a supreme and 
immaterial ideal toward which men might strive in their 
struggle to escape from their captivity in the material. 

The Stoics, in the centuries just preceding the time of 
Christ, made philosophy more practical as a guide of 
daily living. They did this by combining Plato’s dualistic 


Ch. 1, 1-18 THE PROLOGUE 61 


philosophy with the earlier idea of Heraclitus that the 
Reason or Logos which guides the world is immanent in 
all things and then carrying this last thought a step 
further. If this immanent Reason pervades all things, it 
is present also in man. Man’s reason is its expression. 
There is, therefore, a spark of the Divine Reason in each 
one of us. 

Stoies explained all life and the world and the universe 
by saying that there are two elemental factors, an inferior 
world of material and a spiritual world which they called 
God. The human spirit belongs to the spiritual world; 
the body to the material. This practical dualism explains 
why life is such an inveterate conflict. It is a constant 
battle between the two, the higher and the lower. The 
human spirit ever feels its kinship with the divine from 
which it proceeded. ‘‘ We are his offspring’’ is the phrase 
which Paul quoted at Athens (Acts xvii, 28). We are 
‘‘fragments of God’’ is an expression which Epictetus used. 

In the time of Jesus a man named Philo lived in Alex- 
andria who was a Jew by blood but a Greek in language 
and environment, and his books were written in Greek. 
He made it his life purpose to mediate between the Old 
Testament ideas of God and the prevailing Hellenistic 
ideas of God of his day. The high ethical ideals of the 
Jewish religion and its moral God appealed strongly to 
the Mediterranean civilization, but Greek-minded men 
could not believe that God ‘‘spoke’’ to the prophets or 
that he created the world in six days. Philo made the one 
world of thought feel at home in the other by finding a 
word with two kindred meanings, the one fitted to contain 
the Hebrew teaching, and the other the Greek ideas. 

‘‘Logos’’ was the term thus discovered or rather adopted 
by him. It had two usages, both well established. The 
one sprang from the close connection of the word with 
the common verb ‘‘to speak’’ or ‘‘to say.’’ This usage is 
very frequent in the Greek Old Testament, which was 
Philo’s Bible. It is found in such passages as ‘‘The word 


62 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of Jehovah came unto’’ the prophet (Hosea i, 1; I Kings 
xii, 22). That usage is also very common in the New 
Testament. 

The other usage was just as natural and easy to under- 
stand; from it we get our English derivative, ‘‘logic.’’ 
In this sense of ‘‘reason’’ the word serves as a strong 
cable in Philo’s handling with the ‘‘reason’’ which Herac- 
litus and especially the Stoics taught was the guiding 
Power of all creation and all life. It was the exact term 
current in the popular Stoicism of Jesus’ time.” Philo’s 
great contribution to the syneretistic philosophy of the 
day consisted in this combination of Oriental religion and 
Greek philosophy which he effected by the use to which 
he put this double usage of the term ‘‘logos.’?’ He main- 
tained that wherever the Old Testament speaks of the 
word (logos) of God the reference is to that divine power 
which the Greeks call Reason (Logos). That pointed a 
way by which any believer in Greek philosophy might 
find it written into every part of the Old Testament and 
every Jew might feel that his ancestral religion was in 
harmony with the general philosophy of the Empire. 

With these two meanings of the term, ‘‘ Word’’ in mind, 
one further comment is needed for the interpretation of 
the first verse of the prologue. In the common English 
translation the word ‘‘God’’ occurs twice, but while in 
the first case the use of the noun, God, is proper, in the 
second case a different form in the Greek is used which 
is practically an adjective. The author uses the first form 
when he means the personal God and the word might then 
for a Jew be translated ‘‘Jehovah.’’ The author uses the 
second form to emphasize the quality rightly attributable 
to God and it might for both Jew and Greek, but espe- 
cially for the Greek, then be translated ‘‘divine’’ or ‘‘es- 
sentially God.’’ The meaning of the verse then becomes 
plain and simple. It is in three parts: (a) It concedes to 
the Greek his conviction that from the beginning Reason 

’ Case, p. 263. 


Ch. 1, 1-18 THE PROLOGUE 63 


has ruled the world but claims that this concession sets up 
no conflict with the idea of a personal God; that (b) 
both ideas may co-exist side by side, and that (c) God may 
and does correspond to both the Jewish Jehovah and the 
Greek Reason. (a) In the beginning was the Logos, and 
(b) the Logos existed along with God, and (c) the Logos, 
essentially speaking, was God. 

A famous passage in Goethe’s Faust is full of sugges- 
tion in explaining the meaning of the word ‘‘logos.’’ The 
theological student is brooding over his text and commen- 
taries to get the right equivalent of this word ‘‘logos.’’ 
First he translates it ‘‘Word,’’ then ‘‘Thought’’ or 
‘*Mind,’’ then ‘‘Power,’’ then ‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘Action.’’ It 
would not be far wrong to say that something of all four 
(Wort, Sinn, Kraft, Tat) entered into the most ancient 
usage. 

’T is written: “In the beginning was the Word?’ 
Here am I balked: who now can help afford? 

The Word?—Impossible so high to rate it; 

And otherwise must I translate it. 

If by the Spirit I am truly taught, 

Then thus: “In the Beginning was the Thought.” 
This first line let me weigh completely, 

Lest my impatient pen proceed too fleetly. 

Is it the Thought which works, creates, indeed? 

“In the Beginning was the Power,” I read. 

Yet, as I write, a warning is suggested, 

That I the sense may not have fairly tested. 


The Spirit aids me: now I see the light! 
“In the Beginning was the Act,” I write. 


(Faust I, Scene iii. Tr. by Bayard Taylor.) 


The purport of the remaining portions of the prologue 
follow easily. ‘‘ All things came into being through him”’’ 
(3) is a concession to the Greek idea that reason which 
remains to energize and administer rather than a single 
stark executive act of God, soon over, is the final explana- 
tion of all phenomena. The reading is in line with Philo’s 
interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis. From such 
a passage as ‘‘God said: Let there be light; and there 


64. THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


was light’’ Philo argued that it was the ‘‘word’’ (‘‘God 
said’’) the ‘‘logos’’ in the Greek sense of reason, which 
produced the light which made and kept all things from 
going dead. 

In interpreting the worship of Osiris, Plutarch, a con- 
temporary of John, says in similar fashion that in his per- 
son Osiris represents the ‘‘Logos’’ and in his Logos-fune- 
tion instituted the rational world. 

‘‘In him was life and the life was the light of men’’ (4) 
is in line again with the Greek teaching that reason is 
the vital spark of all life and like an invisible sun, it shines 
away in the darkness of superstition and ignorance for 
the purpose of showing men the way out. 

The author goes on to explain (9) that the true reason 
which is the light of every man ever born was coming 
into the world in a more direct way than ever before. 
It had always been in the world (10) and was, as the 
Greeks held, the explanation of all things in the world, 
but the world in general had never taken anything like 
full advantage of its offer to supply men light and life. 
Then, wonderful to relate, it came to such clear expression 
in our day (14) in one single life that common people 
upon acquaintance with that man recognize the glory and 
loveliness of the revelation. As an only son peculiarly 
represents his earthly father, he is the only man who has 
given an adequately true idea of what his father is like. 
In spite of some passages to the contrary in the Old Testa- 
ment, Christians are quite ready to concede that no one 
(18) has seen God at any time; but they believe that Jesus 
is the only true son and bosom companion of his father 
who has taken full advantage of the light and life which 
‘‘the Logos’’ offers to men. 

To give an insight into the meaning of John’s first sen- 
tences for the average Greek of Ephesus they should be 
translated somewhat as follows: 

i, 1. From the beginning there has been reason in all 

*Case, p. 321. 


Ch. 1, 1-18 THE PROLOGUE 65 


things, guiding and directing them. Reason has dwelt 
with God. Reason was, essentially speaking, God. 2. This 
Reason existed from the beginning with God. 3. All 
things came into being through a vital spark imparted by 
Reason and nothing ever happened without reason having 
the upper hand in it. 

4. Reason has been the source of such light of life or 
reason as men have taken advantage of and used. Its light 
is shining in earth’s darkness, and the darkness has never 
overcome it. 

9. The source of all the light which the human race 
has ever used was (in the time of John) making a new 
invasion into the world of men. 10. It had always been 
shining away in the world, and the world came into being 
through it, but the world had never half-recognized or 
made use of its supplies of light and life. 11. So now when 
it had come personally into the world (of men) which 
was akin to it, men, although they were its kindred, did 
not understand it, nor accept it. 14. To be specific, the 
divine Reason took on human form, embodied itself in a 
human life, and lived among us so visibly that we cannot 
help but recognize its beauty—a beauty as closely related 
to God as only a true son is to a father—compact of appeal 
and conviction. 

18. It is still true that no one has ever seen God. But 
Jesus, like that one only of his sons who is the express 
image of his earthly father, has revealed him to us, 


CHAPTER V 


JOHN THE BAPTIST AND JESUS 
JOHN 1, 19-51 


‘In the collection of religious talks gathered together at 
the close of the author’s long ministry in Ephesus the first 
one puts an emphasis on the contrast between John the 
Baptist and Jesus. It comes first in the collection because 
it logically belongs there, since it deals with the relation 
of Christianity to its ancestral religion, Judaism. The 
purpose of the discourse is to make clear to its Ephesian 
audience why it is better to join the Christian Church 
than the Jewish Synagogue or the Church of John the 
Baptist. It is this immediate denominational purpose 
which gives to this chapter the vital power which has been 
felt by its readers in every age. The talk as it was given 
by him orally is of course not reproduced in full. The 
chapter is to be regarded as a brief digest, or, better 
still, as a page or two of personal notes which a speaker 
makes for his own use as a basis for an oral address. 

The author makes his points both with reference to 
Judaism in general, and also, as just suggested, with par- 
ticular reference to the reformed Judaism of the Church 
of John the Baptist. A sect of John the Baptist existed 
as a distinct religious body down to the third century. 
There are many references to it in early Christian liter- 
ature. The clearest of these is in Acts xviii and xix. In 
xvill, 25, Apollos at Ephesus is described as ‘‘knowing 
only the baptism of John.’’ Jesus was regarded by this 
sect as John’s most brilliant disciple. John, its leader and 
founder, however, was the Messiah or ‘‘the Prophet.’’ The 

66 


Ch. 1, 19-28 JOHN THE BAPTIST 67 


religion of the disciples of John was highly ethical, similar 
in many ways to the historic Judaism of the prophets, but, 
like historic Judaism, it lacked the teaching of an indwell- 
ing divine spirit to supplement and remedy the powerless- 
ness of men otherwise to live up to the Law. It seems 
to have laid great stress upon a future Day of Judgment 
and the punishment then to be visited upon all sinners. 


JOHN THE BAPTIST 
JOHN I, 19-28 


19. And this is the testimony of John when the Jews 
sent priests and Levites to ask him, Who are you? 20. 
And he confessed and did not deny; and he confessed, I 
am not the Christ. 21. And they asked him, What then? 
Are you Elijah? And he says, I am not. Are you the 
prophet? And he answered, No. 22. Then they said to 
him, Who are you? ‘Tell us, for we must have some an- 
swer to give to those who sent us. What do you claim for 
yourself? 23. He said, I am a voice of one calling in the 
desert: Make ready the way of the Lord. 24. And these 
men had been sent as representatives of the Pharisees. 

25. And they asked him, Why then are you baptizing, 
if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the prophet? 
26. John answered, I am baptizing with water; but there 
is some one standing among you whom you do not know. 
27. The one who is to come after me, whose shoe I am 
not worthy to undo. 28. This took place at Bethany 
across the Jordan, where John was baptizing. 


The first part of the talk comparing John and Jesus 
is primarily a picture of John. The outstanding charac- 
teristic is its negative attitude toward the Baptist. As a 
whole the painting is a study in contrast. In this first 
part every stroke of the artist’s brush produces a shadowy 
and diminutive effect. The high point of the paragraph 
is reached in verse 23, where the author brings in a quota- 
tion verbatim from the Gospel of Mark in defense of his 


68 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


thesis that the Baptist was nobody at all, but only a voice, 
only a ‘‘sound of calling in a country place.’’ 

The phrase ‘‘this is’? (19) shows at once that what fol- 
lows is cited as corroborative evidence. The delegation of 
Pharisees is an official one; no doubt can be cast upon the 
report of its findings. In verse 20 we read that John the 
Baptist ‘‘confessed’’ (as if he were undergoing a grilling) ; 
then that he ‘‘did not deny’’; and still again that he made 
confession. The threefold emphasis suggests incidentally 
the touch and go of public speech before a popular audi- 
ence. But it is primarily testimony to the frontal attack 
which the author is making upon the members of the sect 
of John the Baptist in Ephesus who proclaimed John to be 
the great religious reformer and Jesus only his most bril- 
liant disciple. John’s abject confession here is not much 
in line with the open, defiant, masculine attitude of the 
John portrayed in Matthew and Luke. It turns out to 
be simply a flat admission that he was not the Messiah. 
The citation of this confession from the Baptist’s own lips 
leaves his followers in Ephesus not a leg on which to stand. 

The mention of Elijah and ‘‘the prophet’’ in verse 21 
should probably not be taken as indicating a gradation or 
variation in the rank given to John the Baptist among 
his followers. Many who expected the inauguration of 
the Messianic kingdom expected it would take place with- 
out the appearance of any personal Messiah. Some ex- 
pected Elijah, some expected only the rise of another in 
the long line of succession of the prophets, to announce 
the kingdom. The three terms Christ, Elijah, ‘‘the 
prophet’’ do represent three lessening degrees of rank, 
and are in accord with the author’s purpose of diminish- 
ing the Baptist’s importance. But it is probable that for 
the followers of John the three terms simply correspond 
to different ideas which all agreed in this: that the Baptist 
was the supreme figure in the new dispensation. By the 
confession of the Baptist’s own lips, this is not so says our 
author. 


Ch. 1, 19-28 JOHN THE BAPTIST 69 


Verse 22 again becomes most vividly apropos in the same 
Ephesus connection. If that be the case, the speaker must 
provide his Ephesian audience with ‘‘an answer’’ for those 
who ask for some explanation of the greatness attributed 
to John. He is able to clinch his case by a direct quota- 
tion from the accepted Christian gospels, showing that the 
Baptist only claimed to be ‘‘a voice of one calling in a 
desert place’’ on the men of his time to be prepared to 
give Jesus the right reception when he should come (cf., 
Mar. i, 3). The figure of the masculine John of Mark’s 
Gospel, so mighty when compared with other men, we have 
his own word for it, is as nothing compared to the majesty 
of Jesus. 

Verse 24, which is practically a repetition of the similar 
statement in verse 19, is repeated to show that the Bap- 
tist’s words in regard to his rank compared with Jesus 
were uttered officially and were no mere casual expression 
of modesty. 

The next denominational argument which would be ad- 
vanced in Ephesus in favor of the religion of John the 
Baptist by its members concerned the rite of baptism. 
Was not baptism the distinctive feature of the new re- 
ligion from Palestine? Whoever instituted baptism must 
be its founder. John the Baptist instituted baptism and, 
therefore, he was the founder. So the argument would run. 
What is the answer of the Christians of Ephesus to this 
argument? The author makes immediate and challenging 
reply, ‘‘John answered them, I baptize with water.’’ He 
postpones the completion of the antithesis which he has 
in mind to the following paragraph (33). This art of one 
thing at a time is characteristic of the Gospel and one of 
its elements of power. All the author intimates here is that 
mere water is only one form of baptism and a patently 
inferior one. 

Then, the author proceeds to sketch in the picture with 
touches that are to give added clearness and distinctness 
to the contrasting form of baptism which he is soon toa 


70 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


present. ‘‘There is one standing among you.’’ The word 
‘‘standing’’ carries the force of towering and dominating 
possessed by a mountain wall seen from the valley below. 
We have it on the authority of the Baptist’s own lips 
that ‘‘he is not worthy to unloose the shoe latchet of his 
Lord.’’ The author is able again to quote his words from 
the Markan Gospel. 

Another detail which makes for increased definiteness 
and vividness is the statement of the locality. All this 
happened at ‘‘Bethany across the Jordan.’’ The fact 
that the exact location meant by him has become uncertain 
in the centuries since does not detract from the added con- 
ereteness which it imparted to the picture for its imme- 
diate audience. 


THE LAMB OF GOD 
JOHN I, 29-34 


29. The next day he sees Jesus coming and says, There 
is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. 
30. This is the man of whom I said, After me there is 
coming a man who is even now before me: for he was ever 
first. 31. And I did not know him myself; but it is in 
order that he should be made known to Israel that I came 
baptizing with water. 32. And John testified, I saw the 
Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven; and it re- 
mained upon him. 33. He is the one who baptizes with 
the Holy Spirit. 34. He is the Son of God. 


Verses 29-34 compose the second section in which first 
place is given to Jesus. It is a picture of a great and 
massive Jesus and beside him a diminutive and shadowy 
John. If we regard the paragraph 19-28 as constituting 
one side of the picture, let us say the left side, then the 
present paragraph forms the center and the next para- 
graph the right of the canvas. All blend together as a 
baptism scene. It is more really a scene than a narrative 
succession of events. Nowhere is it stated or the least hint 


Ch. 1, 29-34 THE LAms or Gop 71 


given that Jesus was ever baptized. Godet says the bap- 
tism must have preceded verse 29. Yet the preceding verses 
contain no suggestion of it. It is in verses 29-34 that we 
have the heart of the painting of the baptism for our 
author. Reference would be made to it here if any- 
where; but such a narrative of events is not the present 
purpose. 

‘“‘The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the 
world.’’ It is unfortunate that the word lamb conveys 
to a modern American so little of the peculiar meanings 
which it possessed for a pastoral people. Modern mission- 
aries have made desperate and very limitedly successful 
attempts to recover for us the meaning of the phrase. 
Grenfell’s use in his Labrador work of the expression ‘‘the 
young seal of God’’ demonstrates the impossibility of trans- 
planting such expressions to lands where they are not 
indigenous. ‘‘The young seal of God’’ seems so incon- 
eruous to us as to be an affront to Jesus. Alaskan min- 
isters have almost insuperable difficulty with the parable 
of the lost sheep, and have found it necessary to make 
substitutions more in accord with the life of the people 
to whom they are ministering. 

Such illustrations bear testimony to the fact that the 
phrase ‘‘lamb of God’’ once had a significance quite apart 
from its literal meaning. All commentators are agreed, 
however, that the primary reference of that old significance 
was not to the sacrificial system of the Jews. All refer it 
rather to the song of the Servant of Jehovah in Isaiah 1ii, 
13-liii, 12, where the Servant in his humiliation is likened 
foraaeolamb?’) (liity7). 

Professor Moore has shown that there is no case in 
Hebrew ritual in which a dying lamb is thought of as 
bearing the sin of the people and vicariously suffering for 
the people (in the article on Sacrifice in the Encyclopedia 
Biblica). Two facts may be taken as fairly well estab- 
lished. (1) The Gospel of John puts far more emphasis 
on the life of Jesus than on the death. (2) Isaiah liii was 


2 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


written with reference first of all to the nation of Israel 
suffering in captivity. The nation personified as the Serv- 
ant of Jehovah could not die except in a figurative sense; 
for the prophet believed that Israel would endure to the 
end. 

He ‘‘takes away the sin of the world.’’ The old trans- 
lation read ‘‘beareth the sin of the world’’ and is partly 
responsible for a too theological understanding of these 
words. He takes away, bears away, 7.e., removes the sins 
of the world as a gardener uproots and removes the weeds 
of his garden. The results are similar; the processes when 
we spell out the comparisons are, also, similar. The gar- 
dener acts as the Intermediary and the barrow and the 
hoe may be said to do the work. So, also, Jesus is the 
Intermediary, and the Light and Life imparted by the 
Logos, the active agency of removal. The author of this 
Gospel is always mindful of the immediate, practical, con- 
crete significance of what he says. There is no doubt that 
his reference is to the fact that ‘‘belief on Jesus’’ was 
reclaiming men and women daily in Ephesus from habits 
of immorality, from anger and jealousy, and from the . 
fruits of the flesh in general. Every day in Ephesus some 
man found it to be true that ‘‘belief on Jesus’’ could 
‘‘take away’’ sins of his that had always stuck closer to 
him than a brother and thus liberate and enable him to 
realize his capacities for a higher existence. 

Verse 30 is the cross reference to verse 27, which joins 
this paragraph with the preceding. Then in the verses 
following the contrast is dwelt upon between the old bap- 
tism with water practised by the Jews, and the new and 
higher distinctively Christian baptism which the author 
portrays. 

There is a way of applying the microscope to these 
verses, and making verse 31 mean that the work of ref- 
ormation of the Baptist in Israel was as nothing in his 
eyes compared to his mission to point out the coming Mes- 
siah. This would be in line with the author’s picture of 


Ch. 1, 29-34 THe LAMB OF GoD 73 


the Baptist. There is no need, however, to go as far as 
that. 

It should be noted that the author here seems to take 
over the view which had considerable popularity in the 
early church that Jesus was a man until at Baptism God 
‘‘adopted’’ him by descending and becoming incarnate 
in him. In reality the author probably thought of Jesus 
as from his birth the incarnation of the preéxistent and 
ever-existent Spirit of God. But this culminating incident 
of the descent of the Spirit which occurred in connection 
with the baptism received by Jesus at the hands of John 
to which this Gospel never refers is of great value to our 
author in bringing out his views of the office of the Holy 
Spirit. 

The contrast between water baptism as practised by the 
sect of the Baptist and spirit baptism as practised among 
Christians is well described in a passage in the Book of 
Acts (xviii, 24-xix, 7). Apollos was an eloquent man 
and well trained in the Scriptures, ‘‘knowing only the bap- 
tism of John.’’ Paul came to Ephesus and found dis- 
ciples won by Apollos into membership in the sect of John 
the Baptist; and he said to them, ‘‘Did you receive the 
Holy Spirit when you believed?’’ And they said, ‘‘We 
did not even hear that there is a Holy Spirit.’’ And when 
they had listened to Paul’s explanation they were baptized 
into the name of the Lord Jesus, ‘‘and when Paul laid 
his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them.’’ 

Here the Gospel of John presents the same view of what 
transpires at baptism as that of Acts just related. Luke 
says the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily form as a dove, 
but John puts the emphasis upon the invisible Spirit. 
His aim was to make a Christian convert of any one 
in Ephesus undecided whether to join the sect of the Bap- 
tist or that of Jesus. Jordan’s stream and Jewish puri- 
fications and water baptism exercise a beneficial effect in 
purifying the soul, but one not to be compared with the 
Spirit of God, coming down out of Heaven and abiding 


74 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


upon Jesus, who has become for us the Son of God, who 
baptizes us with the fire of the Holy Spirit which bestows 
upon us the life eternal. 


THE TWO DISCIPLES 
JOHN I, 35-42 


35. Again the next day John was standing with two 
of his disciples; 36. And seeing Jesus, he says, There is 
the Lamb of God. 37. And the two disciples heard him 
say this, and they followed Jesus. 38. And Jesus, turn- 
ing, says to them, What do you seek? And they said to 
him, Rabbi (which means Teacher), where are you stay- 
ing? 39. He says to them, Come, and you will see. So 
they came and saw where he abode; and they abode with 
him that day; it was about four in the afternoon. 40. 
One of the two was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41. 
He at once finds his own brother Simon, and says to him, 
We have found the Messiah (which means Christ). 42. 
He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, 
You are Simon: you shall be called Cephas (which is 
Hebrew for Peter and means Rock). 


Verses 35-42 make up the third section of the picture. 
As 19-28 painted the Baptist and 29-34 portrayed Jesus, 
so these verses picture John in the actual act of encour- 
aging his disciples to leave him and turn to Jesus. It forms 
a counterpart of that scene in the Book of Acts where 
a number of John’s disciples in Ephesus were won over 
to the Church of Jesus. It graphically represents what 
our author or speaker wishes to bring to pass among his 
own hearers. 

The words ‘‘ Again the next day’’ are not so much an 
indication of time in a narrative as of a point of transi- 
tion in an argument or plea. Here stand two of John’s 
disciples. They are not pictured as looking first at John 
and then at Jesus and deciding that Jesus is the one to 
follow. It is the Baptist himself who points his disciples 


Ch. 1, 35-42 THE Two DISCIPLES 75 


to Jesus. There can be no uncertainty left. Whether the 
Ephesian listener has the Gospel of Mark quoted so. point- 
edly in the present chapter to read, or depends upon the 
present speaker, he will find there is no excuse for any 
man or woman of Ephesus to attend the church of the 
Baptist—the Baptist himself pointed his disciples to Jesus. 

‘‘There is the Lamb of God.’’ Just as section two was 
linked to section one by the repetition of a characteristic 
phrase, so the final one of the three sections is linked to 
the preceding by the repetition of this outstanding ex- 
pression. All goes to form one great unity. ‘*‘What do 
you seek?’’ (88) is a question of largest significance in 
relation to the immediate Ephesian situation. In Ephesus, 
as in Athens, men were ‘‘seeking God’’ (Acts xvii, 27), 
if haply they might find him and know where he abides. 
He is, as the passage in Acts continues, ‘‘not far from 
each one of us,’’ and the simple answer to the Ephesian 
searcher is ‘‘Come (with us) and See.’’ That answer has 
been repeated in every Christian church in every age, it is 
the answer hung in the window of many a Christian 
Mission, it is the answer of Christian experience, ‘‘Come 
and See.’’ And they came and saw where he abode; and 
they abode with him. This is the pattern again of the 
result that follows on acceptance of the Christian invitation 
in Ephesus and elsewhere. ‘‘Abide’’ is one of the large 
words of the Gospel; ‘‘ Abide in me and I in you’’ (xv, 
4-10; xiv, 23). 

Perhaps the evangelist gave this invitation at an after- 
noon service in Ephesus and that gave a solemn emphasis 
to his appeal when he added, ‘‘It was about four in the 
afternoon.’’ Study of first century customs makes it 
appear that this was just the hour at which a Christian 
talk might be delivered. There was then no Christian 
legal holiday corresponding to our Sunday, and its morn- 
ing hours were usually given over to work. The after- 
noon hour before sunset, after the heat of the day, was 
the most convenient time for a religious service. 


76 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Verses 40-42 recounted another event which the speaker 
hoped to find echoed in Ephesian Christian experience. 
How often it happens that a very simple, almost unknown 
Christian becomes the instrument in God’s hand for bring- 
ing to Jesus some brother who becomes a great leader! 
Every great preacher can recall the influence of some 
disciple unknown to the world in turning him toward the 
Christ. It is a type of the mighty and constant service 
to the Cause rendered by the man or woman who can 
never hope to be great. It was so in Ephesus. Our author 
makes a potent appeal of it. The insignificant Andrew 
brought the great Simon Peter. The most humble listener 
in the Ephesian audience can do as much. It is this mis- 
slonary spirit which made the Church of Jesus grow. 

This paragraph, 35-42, like other sections, is full of 
instances of the author’s popular style of speech. Note the 
repeated use of ‘‘and’’ in verses 37-39. Note also the 
change in tense of verbs and the frequent use of the his- 
torical present. The translation of the word ‘‘Rabbi’’ in 
verse 38 shows in the first place that the author had dis- 
tinctly non-Jewish people in his audience. Likewise, in 
verse 41 the translation of the word ‘‘Messiah’’ may be 
understood in the same way, and in verse 42 the trans- 
lation of the name ‘‘Cephas.’’ Another indication of his 
popular style is the occurrence of what might be called a 
genuine colloquialism in verse 41. The word ‘‘own’’ has 
always been a puzzle to exegetes. No one else is referred — 
to who has a brother named Simon in this passage. The 
word ‘‘own’’ has always seemed superfluous. Westcott 
says: ‘‘The words imply that some one else was after- 
wards found.... We may conclude that this was the 
brother of the second disciple.’’ It is one of many eases 
in which the papyri have altered our idea of the meaning 
of a word. In the papyri we find the word ‘‘own’’ occurs 
frequently in colloquial dialect * and is nothing more nor 


1Deissmann, Licht vom Osten 4, p. 188, note 1; Light from 
the Ancient Hast, III, 3, 5, note; also Deissmann, Bible Studies. 


Ch. 1, 48-51 JESUS AND THE GUILELESS JEW [7 


less than a duplication corresponding to the double nega- 
tive or to such an expression as ‘‘perfectly all righi.’’ It 
is a precious bit of evidence for the colloquial style of our 


author. 


JESUS AND THE GUILELESS JEW 
JOHN I, 43-51 


43. The next day Jesus finds Philip; and he says to 
him, Follow me. 44. Philip was from Bethsaida, the city 
of Andrew and Peter. 45. Philip finds Nathanael, and 
says to him, We have found the one about whom Moses 
and the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of 
Joseph. 46. And Nathanael said, Can anything good 
come out of Nazareth? Philip says to him, Come and 
see. 47. Jesus saw Nathanael coming and says, Here 
is a true Israelite in whom there is no guile! 48. Nath- 
anael says, How do you know me? Jesus answered, Be- 
fore Philip called you, when you were still under the fig 
tree, I saw you. 49. Nathanael answered, Rabbi, you are 
the Son of God; you are King of Israel. 50. Jesus an- 
swered, Do you believe in me because I told you I saw 
you under the fig tree? You shall see greater things than- 
these. 51. Verily, verily, I say to you, you shall see 
heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and de- 
scending upon the Son of Man. 


In Ephesus the question: What is the difference between 
perfect Judaism and Christianity had to be faced fre- 
quently in personal interviews. Paul used to answer this 
question by saying that no one can be a perfect Jew, no 
one can perfectly keep the law; therefore, God had to 
reveal another way of salvation. Our author answers 
it in his own different, characteristic way. He shows a 
Jew who was guileless talking with Jesus and presents 
Jesus himself giving the answer. 

“The next day’’ (43) is the notice that we are passing 
another transition point in the continuing argument. In 


78 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


verse 44 the mention of Andrew and Peter links this para- 
graph to the preceding. In verse 45 Philip’s finding of 
Nathanael is another picture of the Christian way of 
bringing some one—this time a Jew loyal to his Juda- 
ism—to Jesus. 

It it somewhat difficult to understand why the author 
speaks of Jesus as the ‘‘son of Joseph’’ (45) not only 
here but elsewhere in the Gospel (cf., vi, 42). It is possible 
that the author found a certain inconsistency for his own 
thought in the two ideas of preéxistence and virgin birth. 
A virgin birth for Jesus is never referred to nor is any 
convert-making use ever made of it by him. Certain it is 
that any reference to a virgin birth for Jesus would con- 
stitute a stumbling-block and not a stepping-stone to a 
Jew hitherto loyal to his Judaism, who was trying to 
make up his mind to cross over into membership in the 
Christian church. 

The question (46) ‘‘Can anything good come out of 
Nazareth?’’ again acquires its largest significance when 
thought of as addressed in the Ephesian situation to Jews 
wavering between loyalty to the synagogue down the street 
and the adoption of the name of Christian. Nazareth was 
an unknown place. Yet this author is asking Jews in 
Ephesus to believe in a man from Nazareth as their Savior. 
They would be thinking of Jerusalem as the only spot to 
which God would send the Messiah. A Gentile would 
think first of Rome. The same negative attitude is in the 
mind of a modern man when he asks why he should put 
his faith in an Oriental teacher who lived two thousand 
years ago. The answer which the author of this Gospel 
gives is again the challenge of the Christian experience 
“*Come and See.’’ 

Nathanael is an Israelite in whom there is none of the 
pretense and hypocrisy ascribed to the Pharisees of 
Jerusalem in the other Gospels (Mat. vi, 2, 5, 16). Our 
author is drawing a picture of what takes place when 
Jesus and a perfect Jew stand face to face. It reminds 


Ch. 1, 43-51 JESUS AND THE GUILELESS JEW 9 


us of the scene of the rich young ruler who had kept ‘‘all 
these things from his youth up.’’ Jesus’ heart goes out 
to the perfect Israelite. Christianity in Ephesus is willing, 
also, to give all credit to a faithful worshiper of another 
religion. Jesus can see through the heart of every man 
or woman in Ephesus. Such was John’s suggestion. This 
insight was not considered by our author as a sign or 
miracle because he expressly describes an incident related 
in the next chapter as the first sign which Jesus showed. 
The confession of Nathanael is intended to be representa- 
tive; every one who is completely religious in his life, Jew 
or Gentile, will recognize in Jesus, once he will let him- 
self be persuaded to make his acquaintance, the revelation 
of God. Nathanael’s confession, therefore, like so many 
other statements in the Gospel, is in both Greek and Jewish 
form. ‘‘Son of God’’ is more intelligible to the Greek; 
*“King of Israel’’ to the Jew. 

In the next verses, 50, 51, the subject of the relation 
of Christianity to Judaism is continued. The Christian 
religion gives full credit to the good in any Nathanael 
and any Nathanael must of himself recognize in Jesus the 
greatest Rabbi. The Christian religion has ‘‘greater 
things’’ (50) in store for any Nathanael who will come 
and see. By these ‘‘greater things’’ reference is not made 
to the miracles of Jesus’ ministry, but to the spiritual 
wonders of Jesus’ power to save and to heal in Ephesus 
and elsewhere. Repeated use of the phrase in later pas- 
sages of John makes this quite evident (cf., xiv, 12). 

John had a habit of ending each of his religious talks 
with a little apocalypse. Verse 51 is one of these little 
apocalypses. In this instance, ‘‘Heaven opened’’ is our 
author’s way of telling the Jews in his audience in their 
own thought language that Jesus can also do the greater 
things for the Jew that he does for the Greek, by giving 
the Greek full access to the Logos-Light. The earlier 
Jewish idea of heaven was a place reserved for God and 
his angels, while human beings at death go to Sheol. In 


80 THE GosPEL Or JOHN 


John this gives way to new Christian teaching, more in 
line with Hellenistic thought. The reference in the ladder 
set up between earth and heaven to Jacob’s ladder is so 
plain that it (Gen. xxviii, 12) would be unmistakable to 
any well-trained Jew. Something greater even than the 
high ethics of a perfect Judaism is obtainable by the Jew 
who will let himself be persuaded to make the acquaintance 
of Jesus. Heaven will descend to men on earth and by 
means of this power from on high the former Jew, now 
become Christian, may begin to live the life eternal that 
shall never know an end. 


CHAPTER VI 


THE WEDDING AND THE WINE 
JOHN I 


ii, 1. And the third day there was a wedding in Cana 
of Galilee. 3. And when the wine gave out, Jesus’ mother 
says to him, They have no wine. 4. And Jesus says to 
her, Woman, what have you to do with me? My hour 
has not yet come. 6. Now there were six stone water- 
jars set there after the Jews’ manner of purifying, each 
holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7. Jesus says, Fill the 
water-jars with water. And they filled them full to the 
top. 8. And he says to them, Now draw some out and 
take it to the master of the feast. And they took it. 
9. And when he tasted the water now turned into wine, 
and did not know where it had come from (but the serv- 
ants who had drawn the water knew) he calls the bride- 
groom and says to him, Every man sets on first the good 
wine, and when people have drunk freely, then the poorer 
wine: you have kept back the good wine till now. 11. 
This, the first of his signs, Jesus showed in Cana of 
Galilee, and he performed it as a revelation of his power. 


It is necessary to bear constantly in mind that the 


author’s purpose is not that of writing history. His pur- 
pose is to do a work of conversion in the hearts of his 
hearers and persuade them all—whether they be Greeks 
who believe in the Life-and-Light-giving Logos, or guile- 
less Jews who are perfect exponents of the Judaism of the 
Law, or members of the sect of John who believe in the 
purified life of water baptism—that they cannot get along 


without Jesus and ‘‘belief in him. 


?? His method is the use 


81 


82 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of symbol. He will tell as much or little of any incident 
in the life of Jesus as is required to make it useful for the 
symbol or sermon lesson which he is going to draw from it. 

A symbol in common use in the early Church was that 
of something better in contrast to water. In the preceding 
chapter we have just read the words of the Baptist, ‘‘I 
baptize in water;... He baptizes in the Holy Spirit’’ 
(i, 26, 33). We may expect to find here the words, water 
and wine, turned into symbols of the contrast between the 
Christian religion and its rivals, 

As the story begins, the parties concerned are Jesus, 
his disciples, and the mother. The expression which the 
mother uses, ‘‘They have no wine,’’ is noticeable. To be 
sure in outlining the situation the story says that the wine 
had given out. But it is significant that the mother does 
not say, ‘‘They have no more wine,’’ or ‘‘The wine is all 
gone.’’ This would not fit in so well with the lesson 
which the author is endeavoring to suggest, namely, that 
until Jesus brings his power into action, life, as water unto 
wine, is dull and stupid. This marriage feast where wine 
so called has been flowing and where that wine has sud- 
denly given out is a picture of human life. Human life— 
whether Godless or dependent upon the former substitute 
religions—without the power of Jesus has no wine in it 
of the kind of invigoration that does not give out. The 
humdrum daily round of human experience awaits the mir- 
acle of Jesus’ presence to banish humdrum forever. In 
particular the author has in mind the Jewish manner of 
life with its legal statutes and its emphasis upon cere- 
monial and purification. Judaism cannot give to life the 
permanent exaltation of spirit which Jesus can give. 

‘Woman, what have you to do with me?’’ The ques- 
tion has given rise to endless discussion concerning the 
attitude toward his mother shown here by Jesus. It is 
exceedingly difficult to say that there is no disrespect 
apparent in the words. To be sure much of that disrespect 
vanishes when we admit the popular, colloquial, informal 


Ch. 2, 1-11 THE WEDDING AND THE WINE 83 


style of the narrative at its full value. We must realize, 
too, that we are dealing with a Greek translation of Jesus’ 
Aramaic words. But the deepest significance, for this 
Gospel, of Jesus’ question is to be found in the same region 
of symbol as in the case of the mother’s word concerning 
no wine in the preceding verse. In this other world of 
symbol, the mother may be thought of as meaning by her 
saying they have no wine, why not, without more delay, 
reveal to them the secret of the eternal life that never 
gives out? 

Under such circumstances, the apparent disrespect van- 
ishes from Jesus’ reply, Woman, what have you to do with 
me? For at this point, even his own mother according to 
the flesh must not attempt to force his hand. - When that 
time comes, it will be set neither by a judgment of hers 
nor even of his own, but a “‘thus saith the Father to me’’ 
will be behind it. This larger meaning becomes still more 
apparent if we take our stand in Ephesus and think of 
Jesus’ mother as representative of Jesus’ Jewish home and 
of the Jewish religion, which claimed that Christians ought 
to continue to obey the Jewish law. Compare Gal. iii, 23-25. 

Moreover, giving his mother a minor place in his career 
is in accord with the omission in this Gospel of all refer- 
ence to the family tree of Jesus or that he was born of a 
virgin. 

‘‘My hour has not yet come’’ is another puzzle to many 
interpreters. Throughout the Gospel this expression refers 
to the hour of Jesus’ exaltation (vii, 30; xvii, 1). It could 
hardly refer literally to his immediate part in the Cana 
wedding feast in answer to the mother’s suggestion. But 
its meaning in the region of symbol fulfills exactly the 
larger demand of the present passage. The thought was 
common in the New Testament churches that it was not 
until the exaltation of Jesus in his death and resurrection 
that the Spirit was given into the hearts of believers (cf., 
Acts ii, 4, and esp. Rom. viii, 11). ‘‘The Spirit was not 
yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified’’ (John vii, 


84 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


39). The hour has not yet come but the result is about to 
be pictured in this Cana story of what happens when 
Jesus bestows his Spirit. Spiritual want gives place to 
spiritual plenty; life before is to life after, as water unto 
wine. 

The six water-jars represent Judaism. Wherever ordi- 
nary water is mentioned in this Gospel it represents Juda- 
ism or non-Christian religion in contrast to the gospel of 
Jesus (cf., i, 26, 33; ii, 6; ili, 5; iv, 10; Acts xix, 3, 6). 
But as though to make certainty doubly sure the author 
states that the six water-jars were set there for ‘‘the Jews’ 
manner of purifying.’’ Such symbolism would also be 
readily understood in Ephesus, where it had long been 
employed in pagan religious celebrations. Pausanias even 
speaks of ‘‘the empty jars which become filled with wine.’’ 
It was ‘‘the Dionysiac illustration of beneficence and joy.’’* 

If a reader is mathematically minded he may figure the 
amount of wine to have been perhaps as much as seven 
hundred quarts. CGodet tells us not ‘‘to suppose that all 
the wine must have been consumed at this feast... . It 
was... the enduring monument of the Master’s benedic- 
tion upon the youthful household.’’ But this is to miss the 
real suggestiveness of the prodigality, which is intended 
to take the imagination of the Ephesian listener beyond 
the little scene of the wedding and carry it up into the 
immensity of the realms of God’s power and goodness. 
It would recall to the mind of man or woman in Ephesus 
such expressions as that of the next chapter: ‘‘He gives 
the Spirit without measure’’ (John ili, 34). 

The statement in verse 9 that the ruler of the feast 
who tasted the wine ‘‘did not know where it had come 
from’’ is in line with the interpretation thus far given. 
It is an open confession on the part of a spokesman for 
Judaism that the new Christian way of life is a superior 
product to the best Judaism can show. The power of the 
Spirit of Jesus was a marvelous and inexplicable thing 

*Carpenter, Hibbert Journal, 1923, p. 810; Grill, II, p. 107 ff. 


@h. 2, 1-11 THE WEDDING AND THE WINE 85 


to most early Christians. Perhaps John and some of the 
Apostles felt they understood something about it; ‘‘the 
servants that had drawn the water knew.’’ 

This is the first of the ‘‘signs.’’ The office of a sign 
is to possess ‘‘significance.’’ It is no mere accident that 
the author of this Gospel has this favorite word of his own 
for such an incident. The other gospel writers usually 
use such a word as ‘‘wonder’’ or ‘‘miracle.’’ Our 
author extracts a significance from such incidents in a 
special way. A sign is a ‘‘revelation of truth through the 
symbolism of the outward act’’ (Westcott on this passage). 
A sign is usually regarded in John’s Gospel as a sign, 
by way of suggestion or proof, that Jesus is Son of God. 
But throughout the Gospel it is plain that the demonstra- 
tions of the spiritual power of Jesus going on every day 
in Ephesus constitute the real proof that he is the Logos- 
Light incarnate. It is this spiritual power which is either 
symbolized or exhibited in these signs. In the present 
instance the turning of the water into wine is a symbol of 
the power of Jesus to turn the life of an ordinary man or 
woman of Ephesus that dissatisfaction and disappointment 
have brought to a dead stand-still into its very opposite. 
The good wine of the Spirit gives men a new kind of 
health and gladness and joy that never gives out. 

To limit the words to their literal meaning would be as 
unprofitable in this Gospel as to say that when Jesus 
washed the disciples’ feet (xiii, 1-15) the act must be 
taken at its face value only, and that when he said, ‘‘ You 
also ought to wash one another’s feet,’’? he meant to in- 
augurate a single ritual substitute for the brotherhood life 
generally that should characterize his disciples. It would 
be about as sensible as to say that Jesus was a literal vine 
or that God is a farmer (xv, 1). It would be no more 
unreasonable to say that when Jesus fed the multitude 
with five barley loaves, the author expected his reader to 
detect no connection between that statement and the sub- 
sequent one, ‘‘I am the bread”’ (vi, 1-14, 35). 


86 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


What our author did, then, was to select from the memo- 
rabilia concerning Jesus at his command and tell the inci- 
dent thus chosen in such a way as to make it portray 
vividly both the power of Jesus and the most searching 
and deepest facts of Christian experience. He raises and 
answers no questions as a critic would concerning the his- 
torical basis of the story. He gives himself to the larger 
business of centering the attention of his people upon 
developing its religious significance. We do not, of course, 
even have the complete spoken words of the author, but 
only the notes which he used as a basis for his discourse. 
‘You have kept back the good wine until now’’ may be 
taken as an example of the brevity and suggestiveness of 
these notes. 

To sum up our views of the author’s idea and purpose 
we might say that it passed through three stages or phases. 
First, he wished to use the story of the wedding at Cana 
in the interest of his purpose to make his audience in Ephe- 
sus acquainted with the personality of Jesus. Secondly, 
he wished to contrast Christianity with Judaism under the 
symbols of the water and the wine, and to show that Juda- 
f ism has no reason for continued existence now that, 
\ through belief in Jesus, life takes on a kind of invigoration 
-that never gives out. Thirdly, he wished to do the work of 
conversion for the Jews and the members of the sect of 
the Baptist in his audience. Indirectly, this would confirm 
the work of conversion that he had done for the men of 
Greek training, also members of his audience, by his por- 
traiture of Jesus as the Logos-Light incarnate and of the 
life into which ‘‘belief in him”’ leads. 


JESUS AND THE TEMPLE 
JOHN 1, 13-22 
ii, 18. And the Jewish passover was near, and Jesus 
went up to Jerusalem. 14. And he found in the Temple 
the dealers who sold cattle and sheep and pigeons, and 
the money changers sitting at their tables: 15. and he 


Ch. 2, 13-22 JESUS AND THE TEMPLE 87 


made a whip out of rope, and drove them all out of the 
Temple, both the sheep and the cattle; and he scattered 
the changers’ money, and overturned their tables, 16. 
and said to the pigeon-dealers, Take these things away; 
do not turn my Father’s house into a market. 17. His 
disciples remembered the scripture, Zeal for your house 
will consume me. 18. Then the Jews asked him, What 
sign are you showing us, that you do these things? 19. 
Jesus answered, Destroy this Temple, and I will raise it 
in three days. 20. The Jews said, This Temple has been 
forty-six years in building, and are you going to raise it 
in three days? 21. But he was speaking about the temple 
of his body. 22. Afterward, when he had risen from the 
dead, his disciples remembered that he said this. 


The narrative of the Cleansing of the Temple, like the 
story of the wedding, acquires a different meaning when 
set down in church conditions at Ephesus as its context. 
The incident on which it is based is one which the author 
may have witnessed himself, especially if he was (as we 
have presented evidence) a Jerusalem disciple of Jesus. 
There are indications that he knew some at least of the 
episodes he narrates at first hand. It is quite possible 
that he inserts the cleansing of the Temple after his talk 
on the wedding story because of a close parallelism of 
teaching for him in the two. 

Were this view true, it would afford the best explana- 
tion of the introduction of the cleansing of the Temple 
so near the beginning of the Gospel. For lack of an alter- 
native, many scholars have felt compelled to reckon two 
occasions on which Jesus cleansed the Temple, admitting 
he did it in both instances in much the same way, perform- 
ing the same acts and uttering similar words, once at the 
beginning of the ministry as related in John and again 
at the close as related in all the other gospels (cf., Mar. xi, 
15 ff). But if we accept the inference from the oral char- 
acter of John’s chapters that they were independent talks, 


88 Tr GosPeL oF JOHN 


we notice at once the other explanation confirmed to a 
degree by the fact that there is no statement made that 
this incident did occur near the beginning of the ministry. 
This is the more true if it is granted that we are dealing 
with notes rather than a complete script of the author’s 
discourse. There is no reason why John should not use 
two incidents from different parts of the ministry as the 
basis of an original address and its sequel in exposition 
in a double way of the one big subject. Verse 13 is not 
to be regarded as connected in time with verse 12. Verse 
12 may itself be only an editorial conclusion to verses 1-11. 
In any case, the narrative of the Temple cleansing is an 
entirely independent unit and it contains no direct state- 
ment that the incident occurred at the beginning of Jesus’ 
ministry. 

It begins with very simple statements, employing the 
usual popular style of short sentences joined by ‘‘and... 
and...and.’’ While in Jerusalem at the Passover Jesus 
became indignant at the way in which worshipers were 
exploited and cheated. <A sort of trust controlled the 
situation. The basis of the monopoly was the hard and 
fast rule of the priests to accept none but ‘‘perfect’’ ani- 
mals for sacrifice and in practice the only animals likely 
to pass as ‘‘perfect’’ came to be those sold in the court 
of the Temple. Only Jewish money was accepted in the 
buying and selling of these animals and in the payment 
of Temple dues. The coin of daily intercourse was largely 
Roman and Greek, and the money changers exacted an 
unfair commission. That the game of grab rampant in 
the outside world should shamelessly invade the ‘‘house of 
prayer’’ (Isa. lxvi, 7; Mar. xi, 17) might well seem unen- 
durable to a man so little avaricious that he had not where 
to lay his head. 

Verses 18 and 19 provide the telltale indications which 
show that we are coming now to the unfolding of the 
symbol or lesson which our author is going to draw from 
this incident. ‘‘What sign are you showing us?’’ The 


Ch. 2, 18-22 JESUS AND THE TEMPLE 89 


word ‘‘seeing’’ found in the usual version has no basis 
in the Greek text. A suggested secondary meaning, how- 
ever, if not the primary meaning, of the question certainly 
is, ‘‘What sign are you showing us in that you are doing 
these things?’’ That sign and its significance are to be 
unfolded in the following verses. 

On the usual view, ‘‘sign’’ in the Gospel of John is 
always supposed to refer to a supernatural event. ‘‘Sign’’ 
probably always does in John somehow point out that 
Jesus is Son of God or Savior of the world. Buta ‘‘sign’’ 
may qualify for this purpose without possessing any super- 
natural or miraculous quality. Circumcision is a ‘‘sign’’ 
(Rom. iv, 11). That the babe Jesus was wrapped and 
lying in a manger was a ‘‘sign’’ (Luk. ii, 12). The two 
ideas or kinds of signs may be well illustrated by citing 
two parallel passages concerning Jonah. In Luke xi, 30, 
Jonah is a ‘‘sign’’ to the people of Nineveh in the natural 
sense that his preaching was a warning of the fate that 
awaited them. A possible parallel meaning for the present 
passage would be that Jesus’ act of stopping the temple 
merchandising was a warning to those present of dire 
things to come. On the other hand, the same passage con- 
cerning Jonah is referred by Matthew (xii, 39; cf., xvi, 4) 
to the miracle of the deliverance of Jonah from the great 
fish. 

There is nothing, therefore, in the current double usage 
of the word ‘‘sign’’ which would exclude its application 
to the cleansing of the Temple. While it may seem unlikely 
that the Jews on the spot would ask what was the signifi- 
eance of the act at the time, it is quite evident that an 
Ephesian audience would be interested principally in the 
question, What sign was he showing? The objection to 
calling the cleansing a ‘‘sign’’ sometimes found in John 
iv, 54, where the healing of the nobleman’s son is called 
a ‘‘second sign,’’ is overcome if our view is adopted that 
the cleansing occurred near the close of the ministry 
and is regarded by our author himself as subsequent in 


90 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the order of time to iv, 54, which speaks of the second 
sign. 

Jesus’ answer in verse 19 is particularly worthy of 
study. According to Mark (xiv, 58) false witnesses told 
the High Priest and the Council that Jesus had said ‘‘I 
will destroy this Temple made with hands and in three 
days I will build another not made with hands.’’ As in 
some other incidents of the Passion Week and the Jeru- 
salem ministry, so here also our author is the better his- 
torian in regard to what really happened than the synoptic 
gospels. That Jesus said ‘‘I will destroy this Temple’’ 
seems exceedingly unlikely. But the probability is high 
that Jesus would have intimated that the Jews were de- 
stroying their Temple by the mercenary abuses that were 
corrupting the highest officials of the national worship 
which has just been pictured. On the principle ‘‘you take 
my house when you do take the prop that doth sustain my 
house,’’ they were destroying the Temple in ruining the 
worship for which it stood. Jesus issued a challenge to 
them and a promise to his followers that if this work of 
destruction were earried out to its bitter end he would 
raise the Temple worship up again, and explained that 
his temple worship would be a spiritual one, not one of 
animal sacrifice. ‘‘Destroy this Temple worship as you 
are doing completely and in three days I will raise one 
not made with hands.”’ 

This had all been proved out by the event before John 
wrote these words, just as in the case of the later predic- 
tion (iv, 21), ‘‘The hour is coming when neither in this 
mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall you worship the Father.’’ 
The Temple form of worship had been destroyed with the 
Temple and ‘‘immediately,’’ or within a very brief space 
of time (this is the meaning of the phrase ‘‘three days’’), 
the Christian form of worship had taken the place of lead- 
ership vacated by it. There can be no doubt that this 
was the meaning intended to be suggested by Jesus’ orig- 


Ch. 2, 13-22 JESUS AND THE TEMPLE 91 


inal words as studied in the light of Mark xiv, 58, and like 
passages, including the present one. 

The interposition of ‘‘the Jews’’ at this point with an 
objection (20), ‘‘Can you in three days rebuild a Temple 
which has been forty-six years under construction?’’ con- 
stitutes a major element in John’s style of exposition. 
Where he wishes to give further explanation of the ‘“‘sig- 
nificance’’ of an act or saying, he introduces the Jews and 
a surface misunderstanding on their part as a foil to bring 
out his own deeper meaning in graphic contrast. The Jews 
were a most religious and spiritual nation. Indications in 
the synoptic gospels show that there were those among 
them who understood that by a temple ‘‘not made with 
hands’’ Jesus meant a spiritual worship. But there is no 
doubt that other Jews wedded to the existing Judaism were 
obtuse and that these references to the crass misunder- 
standings of ‘“‘the Jews’’ enable our author to make his 
points clearer to his audiences. A similar misunderstand- 
ing crops out in almost every chapter (i, 25; 11, 20; ii, 4; 
iy, 11; v. 10; vi, 52; vii, 35; viii, 83, ete:). 

‘‘But he was speaking about the temple of his body”’ 
(of believers). The first noticeable fact in connection 
with this verse is that for many years the Christian Church 
had been called the Body of Christ just as in modern 
religious vocabulary. ‘‘We are members of his body”’ is 
Paul’s statement in Ephesians (v, 80), or, again, ‘‘ You 
are the body of Christ and severally members thereof’’ 
(I Cor. xii, 27). To these statements are to be added 
those others regarding the Church as a temple, ‘‘You are 
a temple of God’’ (I Cor. iii, 16); ‘‘Other foundation can 
no man lay than that which is laid which is Jesus’’ (I Cor. 
ili, 11). Paul spent a longer ministry in Ephesus than 
anywhere else. He founded the churches in the commun- 
ity in which our author lived and worked and talked. It 
is impossible to conceive this verse not being understood 
in Ephesus in the larger sense, namely, that when the 


92 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Jews had brought upon themselves the destruction of their 
Temple worship as well as their Temple, the power of 
Jesus raised in its place a worship of the Father in spirit 
and in truth on the ruins of the destroyed cult of animal 
sacrifice. 

‘“When he was raised from the dead, his disciples re- 
membered that he said this’’ (22). The passing of the 
eult of animal sacrifice would certainly be one outcome of 
Jesus’ teaching to which the disciples would be blind until 
after ‘‘he was raised from the dead.’’ As stated before, 
our author’s primary purpose in his talks is to fill the 
incidents of the gospels with large spiritual meaning, and 
to link the spiritual experiences of the Christians of 
Ephesus with incidents in the life of Jesus. 

This brings us to a statement of the significance to our 
author of the narrative as a whole and the parallelism of 
its teaching for him to the wedding story. It is to be 
noted that the driving of the traffickers from the Temple 
would have corresponded merely to the water side of the 
wedding story. It is only when the worship of the Father 
in spirit and in truth raised up by the power set flying 
all abroad by the resurrection of Jesus, on the ruins of 
the destroyed cult of animal sacrifice is added that we 
have the parallel to the wine of the first story. This 
addition is peculiar to this Gospel, yet no student of the 
passages concerned can well doubt that it belongs here 
and that the words of Mark xiv, 58, belong with the story 
of the cleansing. 

Like the wedding story, this incident of the cleansing 
might be said again to have a threefold purpose. First, 
the author wished to make the episode of the Temple 
cleansing serve his purpose of curing the ignorance of 
these Christians of Ephesus concerning the earthly life 
of Jesus. Secondly, he wished to show how the personal 
power of Jesus and the spoken words of Jesus had brought 
about the transformation from the old-time cult of animal 
sacrifice in a central shrine to the new emancipated spirit- 


Ch. 2, 13-22 JESUS AND THE TEMPLE 93 


ual worship of the Christian Church. Thirdly, he wished, 
along with his appeal to the unconverted Jews of his audi- 
ence to adopt the worship of the Father in spirit and in 
truth, to give at the same time a new symbol of the power 
of Jesus to the men and women of Greek training in the 
same audience whom he was trying to win over by his 
portraiture of Jesus as the incarnation of the Life-and- 
Light-giving Logos. 


CHAPTER VII 


THE BIRTH FROM ABOVE 
JOHN III 


iii, 1. Now there was a man named Nicodemus who was 
a leader among the Jews. 2. He came to Jesus one night, 
and said to him, Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher 
who has come from God. 3. Jesus said to him, No one 
can see God’s realm unless he is born a second time, from 
above. 4. Nicodemus says, How can a man be born when 
he is old? 5. Jesus answered, Unless a man is born of 
water and spirit, he cannot enter God’s realm. 6. What 
is born of the flesh is flesh ; and what is born of the Spirit 
is spirit. 7. You must be born a second time. 8. The 
wind moves where it will, and you hear the sound of it, 
but you do not know where it comes from nor where it 
goes; it is the same with every one who is born of the 
Spirit. 9. Nicodemus said, How can that be? 10. Jesus 
answered, Are you a teacher of Israel and do not under- 
stand this? 

11. We speak of what we know and testify to what we 
have actually seen. 12. If I have told you earthly things 
and you do not believe me, how will you believe me when 
I tell you of heavenly things? 13. And no one has gone 
up into heaven except the Son of Man who came down 
from heaven. 14. And just as Moses lifted up the serpent 
in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15. 
that every one who believes in him may have eternal life. 


In order to make it still clearer that the opening chapters 
of this Gospel are not intended by the author to be re- 
94 


Ch. 3, 1-15 THE BIRTH FROM ABOVE 95 


garded as a mere historical synopsis of events of the min- 
istry of Jesus but as a succession of incidents, all embody- 
ing the one central thought of the fullness of life open 
to us through discipleship to Jesus, let us review briefly 
the course over which the two chapters already studied 
have taken us. 

To the Greek, darkness was a synonym of death and 
upon the Logos-Light of reason or knowledge rested his 
hope of salvation. He believed in the existence of this 
Logos-Light which was able to dispel the darkness in which 
he dwelt, but how to make his way from that darkness into 
that Light, he was obliged to confess was an unknown 
secret to him. 

I will let you into this secret, said our spokesman of the 
‘Christian gospel at the very start to him. Give me a 
patient hearing and I will show you a man and a life in 
which that Logos-Light was embodied from whom you can 
obtain the secret of its possession. 

There were also bound to be in his audiences in Ephesus, 
Sunday to Sunday, Jews belonging to the sect of John the 
Baptist. The bold stroke by which he sought to obtain a 
hearing for the Christian gospel from them was to quote 
their beloved leader’s own words to the effect that Jesus 
far outranked him and to cite instances in which John 
himself advised and persuaded his own disciples to transfer 
their allegiance to Jesus. Baptism was their chief rite. 
From the Baptist’s own lips again, his followers in Ephesus 
are told that what his baptism by water can do is as 
nothing to Christian baptism in the fire of the Holy Spirit 
which bestows upon the recipient the life eternal. Finally, 
he had to deal with Jews still wedded to the existing 
Judaism of Palestine. So, our spokesman for the Chris- 
tian gospel in Ephesus had to show cause why a perfect 
Jew should take the amount of interest required to listen 
to a lengthy exposition of Christianity. I say to you what 
Jesus himself said to a perfect Jew named Nathanael, 
‘““Come and see’’ the greater things than Judaism has 


96 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ever been able to give its devotees which the Christian 
gospel has in store for its believers. Life without Jesus is 
like the wedding feast at Cana, where the so-called wine 
gave out compared to life in the power of Jesus with the 
wine in it of the kind of invigoration that does not give 
out. Doubtless you are not even half-reconciled as a per- 
fect Jew over the fact that the Temple worship perished 
when the Temple itself was destroyed along with Jeru- 
salem. Lament no more. The Christian gospel offers you 
a worship of the Father in spirit and in truth, raised up 
by the power set flying all abroad by the resurrection of 
Jesus to take the place of the former cult of animal sacri- 
fice at a central national shrine. 

Now that he has secured the attention of these three 
classes of the unconverted, the natural next thing for this 
spokesman of the Christian gospel in Ephesus is to address 
himself to the question, With what initiation are men initi- 
ated into the Christian ranks? Hence the next episode 
in the life of Jesus treated by him is this Nicodemus story. 

Again the talk is a popular one in conversational style 
of question and answer. Its use of birth as a symbol 
appeals to every mother or father; and the statement that 
a man may be born a second time and start life afresh, 
is calculated to catch the attention of any one who feels 
that his youth has been misguided and wishes that he 
might make a right start in a new life. 

‘“We know you are a teacher.’’ That ‘‘we’’ is meant 
by the author to include within its circle the people of 
Ephesus before him; and indeed all who recognize a wise 
teacher in Jesus but have not as yet felt his personal 
power. 

‘Unless one is born anew, a second time, from above.’’ 
(3) ‘‘Anew’’ is a word of double usage, like ‘‘wind’’ (8) 
and ‘‘logos’’ (i, 1) and ‘‘living water’’ (iv, 10) and ‘“‘life’’ 
(111, 16) and many other terms in this Gospel. It means 
both ‘‘a second time’’ and ‘‘from above’’ which exactly 
fits in with the author’s purpose in the present passage 


Ch. 3, 1-15 THE BIRTH FROM ABOVE 97 


of using physical birth as a symbol of spiritual regen- 
eration. 

In Matthew xviii, 3, Jesus says, ‘‘Except you turn and 
become as little children you shall in no wise enter into 
the kingdom of heaven.’’ The same truth is expressed 
here. But in the present passage the figure of being born 
again is in line with the Greek dualistic idea that the 
realm of the Light-and-Life-giving Logos and the realm 
of the physical man are essentially different realms ex- 
clusive of each other, in line also with Paul’s great thesis 
that as we are all born of Adam in the flesh so we must 
all be born again to get into the spirit world of God and 
things divine. The Palestine Jew understood more easily 
the simple word ‘‘conversion’’ or ‘‘turning’’ (Mat. xviii, 
3). The Greek understood more easily the radical idea 
of ‘‘regeneration’’ or ‘‘second birth.’’? Moreover, this 
figure was in very wide use by more than one of the leading 
religions of the Greek world of the first century. In the 
Mysteries of Attis the members drank milk ceremonially 
to impress upon themselves the idea that they have started 
a new life.” In the famous description of the reception of 
Lucius into membership in the Mysteries of Isis after he 
has been put through an imitation of death and a sensation 
of dying, he is taught that he has been ‘‘born again.’’’ 
In the later mystery literature the emphasis upon rebirth 
became still more central.’ 

This Gospel’s ideas concerning sin are in line with this 
two-realm view, the realm of the flesh and the realm of 
the spirit. Sin is a failure to cross the Rubicon into the 
higher divine life when the chance offers. It does not refer 
to any positive moral transgressions which come between 
us and God and estrange us. Sin is decidedly negative 
in origin and character, unavoidable in the absence of the 
spirit of God. A state of sin, like a state of darkness, is 

1Of., Kennedy, p. 93. 


?Kennedy, p. 101. 
*Cf., Case, 328 ff. 


98 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


a terrible thing, but is in reality an absence of light. 
The whole matter of sin and salvation in John is dealt with 
upon what, in the light of inherited Greek philosophy, 
would be called a natural basis. If the seed of the Spirit 
of God is planted in our souls through Jesus it naturally 
germinates and grows and that makes us children of God. 
As Paul would say, ‘‘It is no longer I that live but Christ 
that lives in me through his Spirit.’’ Salvation is a simple 
transaction. His Spirit lights the way for us out of the 
realm of the flesh, where darkness reigns, into the realm 
of eternal life. The higher life to which we are thus intro- 
duced brings us into closer kinship with God. We live in 
communion with him. Sin is a love of darkness so great 
that when the light breaks, a soul refuses to move out of 
the realm of the flesh into the realm of the spirit, and 
settles back into darkness. 

The misunderstanding on the part of Nicodemus serves 
the same purpose here as the misunderstanding of the 
Jews in the case of Jesus’ words regarding the raising 
up of a new form of worship. It opens the way to a more 
detailed statement of the deeper spiritual meaning. Such 
misunderstandings occurring so constantly in the Gospel 
are used by the author to avoid treating his audience to 
its face as if its members were spiritually unperceptive. 
It would hardly have done for him to say right out to his 
Ephesian listeners, ‘‘Now I do not expect you to under- 
stand my meaning the first time and so I am going to 
explain it to you over again.’’ But if it is Nicodemus 
who is unperceptive, or as in the next talk the woman 
at the well who asks for explanation, his audience can take 
no offense. 

‘‘Unless one is born of water and spirit.’’ The modern 
Christian who believes in the importance of immersion 
often lays particular stress upon the word ‘‘water’’ in this 
verse. This is, of course, below the horizon of his present 
concern for the mind of our author. Water baptism is 
referred to here only as it represents purity in the nega- 


Gh. 3, 1-15 THE BIRTH FROM ABOVE 99 


tive sense. The rich young ruler was pure and perfect in 
the eyes of the law (Mar. x, 17-22). Nicodemus, too, was 
a good Jew. But John’s great purpose is to show the 
superiority of the Christian religion to Judaism and to 
every other ethical culture body or moral system. Water 
baptism is quite insufficient. It is the new life born of 
the Spirit which is all important, for, compared to it, the 
old life is as death in a realm of darkness. John baptized 
with water (i, 26); Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit 
(i, 33; cf. again Acts xix, 6). 

*“What is born of the flesh is flesh’? (6). This verse 
confirms the natural basis of salvation in the opinion of 
this Gospel noted above. If a man lives his entire life in 
the realm of the flesh he dies when his body dies; he has 
lived quite outside the spiritual world. If the Spirit con- 
ferred by Jesus enters into him, it lights the way for him 
out of the realm of flesh and its darkness into a divine 
spiritual existence triumphant over death and all the ills 
of the physical world. 

‘‘The wind moves where it will’’ (8) is another ex- 
ample of John’s frequent use of words of double meaning. 
The words also mean, ‘‘The spirit moves where it will.’’ 
The reference was a particularly happy one in the ancient 
day. Men did not have as clear an idea as we have of 
the materiality of air; and they had a somewhat more 
materialistic idea of spirit. When they saw the leaves of 
a tree gently moving or they heard the sound of a tempest 
approaching, they could not understand in the least the 
nature of the cause. In like manner, also, was it true 
that men in eeneral did not understand ine nature or 

working of the power of the Spirit of Jesus in the human 
soul. All that could be said of it on the day of Pentecost 
in Acts ii, 2, is that ‘‘there came a sound as of the rushing 
of a mighty wind.... And they were all filled with the 
Holy Spirit.’’ In the modern day as in the first century 
men have little understanding of the way the Spirit moves. 
Of the central fact which is fundamental—the power of 


100 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the Spirit of Jesus in regenerating the personal life of 
men and women—they are in no doubt even if it be some- 
thing which cannot be calculated or predicted. 

‘‘Are you a teacher of Israel and do not understand 
this?’’ (10) No, he did not understand that any such 
initiation into the realm of Spirit was required nor did any 
other teacher of Israel. That was the glaring defect of 
old-line Judaism, as Paul, after his conversion, never tired 
of pointing out to his old comrades still in bondage. The 
plain everyday members of old-line Judaism had never been 
taught that such an initiation was required and the Greeks 
had never been able to find a sure bridge crossing from 
the realm of the physical to the realm illuminated by the 
Life-and-Life-giving Logos. In contrast, says this spokes- 
man of the Christian gospel in Ephesus, the humblest 
Christian preacher can tell you about this initiation and of 
the Spirit that lights the way for us out of the realm of 
flesh where darkness reigns into eternal life. 

Where does the incident end, and the author’s remarks 
begin? There is no doubt that verses 16-20 are the au- 
thor’s own contribution; for in those verses mention of 
Jesus is in the third person and in the past tense. Neither 
ean there be any doubt that in verse 10 our author is still 
reciting or reading a gospel narrative out of the ministry 
of Jesus. Verses 11-14, however, may belong to either 
section. This is characteristic of the Gospel of John. The 
author endeavors to make the transition in each chapter 
from episode to comment or lesson as smooth and unobtru- 
sive as possible. This is parallel to Paul’s way in Gala- 
tians. In Galatians ii, 14, we read, ‘‘I said unto Cephas 
before them all, If thou being a Jew...’’ Thereafter, 
there is no statement to indicate where the record of 
Paul’s public oral words end and his written explanations 
begin. 

In verse 11 is a small yet rather pointed indication that 
the author has closed his recital of this episode. The 
words, ‘‘We speak of what we know and testify to what 


Ch. 3, 1-15 THE BIRTH FROM ABOVE 101 


we have actually seen,’’ are strikingly like the words of 
I John i, 1-2, ‘‘That which we have seen... we testify 
and declare unto you.’’ Testifying to the truth of one and 
another factor in the Christian process of salvation is 
one of the favorite ideas and expressions of our author. 
So here. There seems to be no serious difficulty in the 
way of understanding this verse as meaning, ‘‘We full- 
fledged Christians have been through the experience our- 
selves. We have seen the Spirit at work in each other’s 
lives and know that it has lighted the way for us out of 
the realm of the flesh into the realm of life eternal. We 
eould tell you still more wonderful things, but until you 
believe the beginning of all that follows, what would be 
the use?’’ The expression ‘‘heavenly things’? was a com- 
mon one in the mystery religions by which to designate 
the higher inner teachings. 

The author has recourse in verse 14 to a popular picture 
because it suits so well his purpose. No Sunday School 
pupil ever forgets the thrilling story of the serpent sting 
so fatal unless a powerful antidote counteracts it. What 
story or picture could more clearly or keenly illustrate the 
author’s idea of the office of the Christian preacher? 

To all three of these classes of the unconverted in Ephe- 
sus, he says, what you need, however little you may realize 
it, is to be exposed to the influence of Jesus until you are 
constrained to believe on him and become filled with the 
Holy Spirit. In order that you may come under his influ- 
ence, it is the office of the Christian preacher to hold 
Jesus steadily up before your gaze as Moses lifted up the 
serpent. 

‘That every one who believes in him may have eternal 
life’? (15). Here are two of the largest terms in the 
Gospel of John, and yet his use of them is often misun- 
derstood. To ‘‘believe in’’ or ‘‘believe on’’ Jesus in this 
Gospel means something more than and something different 
from believing anything at all about Jesus. It does not 
refer primarily to the acceptance of any creed or the men- 


102 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tal acceptance of any statement whatsoever concerning 
Jesus. The history of the expression is a long one and 
many are the scholarly treatises which illuminate it. See 
the section on Belief in him in our chapter on the Char- 
acteristics of the Gospel. 

In the first three gospels ‘‘to believe’’ generally means 
‘‘to trust’? and is applied to a trustful attitude toward 
God as a beneficent Father (Mat. viii, 13; xxi, 22; Mar. v, 
36; ix, 23; Luk. viii, 50). In Paul’s letters this trust takes 
the form of a warm attachment to Jesus; it goes deeper 
in the heart and assumes a mystical meaning. ‘‘To believe 
in’’ Jesus means for Paul to give Jesus such right of way 
in one’s consciousness that he becomes master of one’s life. 
Paul could say, ‘‘It is no longer I that live, but Jesus that 
lives in me.”’ 

To John our present state is a state of darkness. Dark- 
ness is the doom of all who reside in the realm to which 
the flesh belongs, not a doom awaiting us, but already 
fastened upon us. No one ean live and move and have 
their being in the dark with any speed, comfort, profit or 
safety. John, in line with the Greek Platonic emphasis 
upon reason, felt that the light of knowledge was funda- 
mental to our salvation. Salvation for those in the dark 
is simple to describe but momentous to go through—it 
amounts to emigration from the cave of the flesh into the 
light of open day shed abroad by the Logos-sun to the 
Greeks he was talking to, and the sunny life of the Mes- 
sianic age to the Jews with whom he dealt. How to make 
the change from the one realm to the other was a conun- 
drum that both Greeks and Jews had hitherto been unable 
to solve. Jesus has the solution. Belef in him is your 
part in that solution. Just how, we cannot tell any more 
than we can tell how a breeze blows up, but belief in him 
does open a channel for the advent of the Holy Spirit 
which lights the way out of the cave of the flesh for the 
Greek and removes the executive paralysis that renders the 
Jew impotent to obey the Law he reveres. Belief in him 


Gh. 3, 1-15 THE BrirtH FROM ABOVE 103 


is the name for John of the clasp of the hand by which 
any one may lay hold on the surcharged Jesus and be him- 
self charged by the Holy Spirit and thus make the crossing 
from darkness to light, from death unto life. 

The expression ‘‘eternal life’’ has practically the same 
meaning as the simple word ‘‘life’’ in this Gospel; for 
John’s use of the word ‘‘life’’ is always in a sense larger 
than the physical. In a search after John’s underlying 
idea the first fact which confronts a reader of the English 
Bible is that the revisers in the case of the word ‘‘ever- 
lasting,’’ in spite of their aversion to changes not abso- 
lutely necessary, have in every case in John’s Gospel re- 
moved that word and have substituted the word ‘‘eternal.’’ 
The reason for the change on the part of the revisers is, 
of course, that the word ‘‘eternal’’ has a different meaning 
from the word ‘‘everlasting.’’ Otherwise it would not 
have been deemed necessary. The change is in line with 
the meaning of the Greek word.” The etymology of the 
English word eternal corresponds to that of the Greek, 
which is derived from the word ‘‘Aeon’’ or ‘‘Age.’’? The 
word would suggest to the Jew a future ‘‘ Messianic age’’ 
and to the Greek a future ‘‘golden age.’’ But Jesus 
declared to his Jewish hearers that the Kingdom of God 
is within you and among you. Among the Greeks also 
the Stoics and the mystery religions taught that men and 
women may live here and now a golden-age life. Our 
author’s central idea, the most fundamental and inclusive 
proposition of his whole Gospel, is that it is possible in 
the midst of suffering and imperfection to receive from 
Jesus a fullness of life which exalts us above the common 
existence of the world and enables us to enter here and 
now into the spiritual brotherhood and the nobility of 
personal life which was hoped for by the Jews in their 
Messianic age and by the Greeks in their golden age. This 
is the life eternal. 


* Brooke, Int. Crit. Com. on I John i, 2; McGiffert, Apost. Creed, 
p. 205. 


104 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


THE NEW LIFE 
JOHN 11, 16-21 


16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only 
Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but 
have eternal life. 17. For God did not send his Son 
into the world to judge the world; but that the world 
might be saved through him. 18. He who believes in him 
is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged 
already. 19. And this is the judgment, that light has 
come into the world, and men have loved darkness rather 
than the light. 20. For every one who does evil hates the 
light, and does not come into the light. 21. But he who 
lives the truth comes to the light. 


Verse 16 is without doubt the best known and the rost 
used verse of the entire Bible. The reason for its pop- 
ularity is the forcefulness with which it states the most 
vital thought of all active religion, the thought of the love 
of God for the human family that led Him to fraternize 
with them and their life in order that they might be en- 
abled and led to fraternize with Him and His life. This 
thought is often found elsewhere in the Bible, but in this 
particular verse it is expressed in unique words that com- 
bine the deepest and most searching experiences of life. 
These most precious words in regard to human existence 
occur in this verse very nearly in the order of their occur- 
rence in human life and history. The greatest word in 
the development of mankind is the word ‘‘God.’’ The 
next in power and importance is ‘‘love.’’ Third is the 
creat ‘‘world’’ of men between whom and God love is the 
unbroken and unbreakable cable. Fourth is the experience 
of giving; fifth, the birth of a son; sixth, trust and part- 
nership; seventh, the predicament of our living death; 
eighth, the attainment of life eternal. All these fundamen- 
tals the evangelist has combined and condensed into one 
sentence, the greatest sentence in the history of religion. 


Ch. 3, 16-21 THe New LIFre 105 


The antithesis contained in the words ‘‘perish’’ and 
‘‘eternal life’’ is an instance of the author’s fondness for 
contrasts; indeed, this particular contrast is the one most 
frequently used by him. Second to it in frequency is the 
contrast of darkness to light (19). In this same paragraph 
are several others of the author’s favorite pairs of alterna- 
tives, God and the world (16), judgment and salvation 
(17), belief and disbelief (18), love and hate (19, 20). 

The words ‘‘perish’’ and ‘‘eternal life’’ have again, like 
other words noted previously, two meanings. The Greek 
word ‘‘perish’’ here is not the usual word for ‘‘die,’’ but 
carries the force of ‘‘giving out,’’ of ‘‘being lost,’’ or 
‘‘disappearing,’’ or ‘‘losing its usefulness.’’ ‘‘ Work not 
for the food which perishes’’ (vi, 27). ‘‘Perish’’ suggests, 
of course, in our own English use of it, primarily physical 
death, but the use of the past tense ‘‘has been judged al- 
ready’’ in verse 18 and the use of the words ‘‘die’’ and 
*‘dead’’ in the sense of ‘‘not alive with eternal life’’ in 
many passages in Paul and John show that is here also 
the meaning (Rom. viii, 10; cf., I Tim. v, 6). The lives 
of those who are ‘‘dead’’ in trespasses and sin have ‘‘per- 
ished,’’ 2.e., have petered out or lost their usefulness 
(though there may be even for those who have ‘‘perished”’ 
in this sense a resurrection). Likewise the phrase ‘‘eternal 
life’’ has a double reference. Without question, this author 
maintains that believers already here upon earth enter 
into the life eternal. This new life of the believer is of 
such a nature that it will never give out. Death has no 
power over it, is utterly unable to lay it low. Hence it 
may be said that eternal life for this Gospel will continue 
in the life hereafter the fulness of life in the Spirit 
begun here. 

The author’s attitude toward a future Judgment Day 
naturally is intimately related to the fundamental ideas 
of this chapter. If, as we have just said, eternal life begins 
here as the natural result of the second birth and if living 
a material life is equivalent to being dead but not yet 


106 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


buried, what function is left for the Great Judgment to 
perform? It should be remembered that Stoicism and 
Epicureanism and Greek philosophy in general also had 
little to say concerning a future Judgment Day. Sec- 
ondly, this must have been one of the main points at issue 
between our author and the Jewish synagogue and in 
particular between him and the sect of John the Baptist 
whose whole teaching centered around the thought of a 
coming terrible judgment. Thirdly, we may say that a 
man who was sure in advance that he was qualified for 
citizenship in the realm of spirit and that the Judgment 
Day was incapable of interposing any barrier to his en- 
trance would put the emphasis of his preaching somewhere 
else altogether. 

‘‘God did not send his Son to judge the world’’ is, there- 
fore, to be understood as intended to be a straight contra- 
diction of the sect of John the Baptist and other sects 
which put a Judgment Day in the foreground of their 
religion. 

‘But that the world might be saved’’ (17). The state- 
ment is often made that John believed only in the salva- 
tion of a selection of the world’s population rather than 
in the salvation of mankind in general. This is only a 
half-truth. We should give full emphasis to the opposite 
testimony of this verse and the preceding verse as well 
(16). Such a verse as xvii, 9, ‘‘I pray not for the world,’’ 
should never be read apart from verses like iii, 16, 17. 
While John recognizes that in the event some are saved 
and others perish, yet he is fully persuaded that the love 
of God embraces the world in its sweep. 

The history of the growth of content in the words ‘‘save’’ 
(17), ‘‘savior,’’ ‘‘salvation,’’ has been. discovered in recent 
years with considerable definiteness.© The Roman Empire 
was in a state of political turmoil and of constant warfare 
in the years preceding the accession of Augustus (31 B.c.). 


5 See especially Case, Evolution of Early Christianity, p. 284 ff; 
Deissmann, Light from the Ancient Hast, IV, 9. 


Ch. 3, 16-21 THE New LIFE 107 


With Augustus came peace, prosperity, international fra- 
ternity. Men everywhere began to call Augustus the 
‘‘savior’’ or ‘‘saver of the whole inhabited world.’’ But 
his salvation did not last nor was it ever complete. In 
later years Claudius (41 to 54 a.p.) was also called savior, 
but his ‘‘salvation’’ again was a disappointment. Then, 
in despair of the accomplishment of world salvation, men 
turned to personal religion in search of personal salvation. 
What all the world of men were seeking to which these 
terms, Savior, saving, salvation, point, our author pro- 
claimed might be found in Jesus and his power, as Paul 
also had done. They were terms rich in meaning and in 
hope deferred to the Hellenistic world, especially during 
the period just preceding the expansion of Christianity. 
The contrast in verse 17 is, then, the contrast between the 
gloomy picture of a coming terrible judgment preached by 
John the Baptist and the good news of Jesus that a way 
of escape from all judgment, which might be taken advan- 
tage of at once, was open, to men—a way of escape imme- 
diately available from the realm of the flesh into the realm 
of the Spirit. 

But John’s Ephesian listeners are insistent that he prove 
his point. In verse 18 we can almost detect a preceding 
unrecorded interrogation of theirs: Do you not believe 
in any judgment day at all? His answer is that the 
Christian believer does not have to face any judgment. 
The man who has escaped from the realm of the flesh into 
the realm of the Spirit has escaped from the jurisdiction 
of the court of judgment. As for the unbeliever a future 
judgment is superfluous, also, for, as any one may observe, 
he has already been condemned and is already suffering 
the punishment of his unbelief by the living death of the 
old life in the flesh which he insists upon continuing to 
live. John was talking tod a world not over-responsive to 
Jewish Oriental apocalyptic imagery. He proclaims: ‘‘ This 
is the judgment: that light has come into the world [to 
light men from the realm of the flesh into the realm. of the 


108 Tue GosPEL oF JOHN 


Spirit] and men have loved darkness rather than light.’’ 
That is the kind of point of view of the judgment which 
appeals to John. He is all for values due and payable 
now and displays little interest in the promissory notes of 
a judgment due and payable in an uncertain and indefi- 
nitely distant future. 

The expression, ‘‘lives (does) the truth’’ (21) occurs 
only here and in [ John i, 6. This Logos-Light incarnate 
in Jesus runs a sharp line of cleavage through the world 
of men. Those on the left hand are they who love dark- 
ness rather than light and retire deeper into their old 
cave life of the flesh. Those on the right are they who 
welcome the Light and let it light the way for them into 
the realm of the Spirit. 


THE SPIRIT WITHOUT MEASURE 
JOHN I, 22-86 


22. After this Jesus and his disciples came into the 
land of Judea; and there he stayed and baptized. 23. 
And John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim. 24. 
For John had not yet been put in prison. 25. So a dis- 
cussion arose between some of John’s disciples and a Jew 
about purification. 26. And they came to John. 27. John 
answered, A man can receive nothing but what is given 
him from heaven. 28. I am not the Christ. 29. The one 
who has the bride is the bridegroom. 30. He must become 
greater and greater but I less and less. 31. He who 
comes from above is above all others; he who is of the 
earth is of the earth; he who comes from heaven is above 
all others. 384. He whom God has sent speaks the words 
of God; for he gives the spirit without measure. 36. He 
who believes in the Son has eternal life; while he who 
does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of 
God abides on him. 


‘* After this’’ (22). These words are this Gospel’s way, 
as we have noted before, of indicating the beginning of 


Ch. 3, 22-36 Tur Sprrir WITHOUT MEASURE 109 


a new section. There are no divisions between paragraphs 
in ancient manuscripts. The Greeks had the aid of no 
such literary machinery as is used in modern writing and 
printing. But they had more particles of speech indi- 
cating relationships. The handiest way for John to indi- 
eate a transition to a new incident was by such an ex- 
pression as this one (cf., v, 1; vi, 1; vii, 1). This is made 
still more evident by the statement that Jesus came into 
the land of Judea. In the preceding episode Jesus is 
already in Judea. If the chapter were undertaking to 
describe a continuous itinerary this statement would not 
be needed. But if these sections are the notes of separate 
sermon addresses, time and place must be restated for 
every episode. When we consider that Jesus’ home was 
in Galilee, every separate Judean incident would natu- 
rally be introduced by the statement that Jesus went up 
to Judea. Such a statement is found many times in the 
Gospel (ii, 13; ii, 23; 11, 22; v, 1; vii, 2, 8,14). 

The statement in this Gospel’s sources that Jesus bap- 
tized is allowed by him to stand here although in iv, 1, 2, 
it is corrected. It is interesting to read in I Corinthians 
that Paul did not personally baptize except in a very few 
eases (I Cor. i, 14). It is possible that Jesus likewise did 
not make a practice of baptizing. On the other hand, 
nowhere else is the statement made that the disciples bap- 
tized before Jesus’ death (cf., Acts vili, 38; Mat. xxvili, 19). 
The question is a difficult one. The idea that Jesus did 
not personally baptize would be our author’s preference 
if, as he held, Jesus’ peculiar function was to baptize 
with the Holy Spirit. 

‘John was baptizing at Aenon near Salim.’’ Geograph- 
ical questions are often perplexing ones in this Gospel. 
The easiest way out is to say that since John’s hearers did 
not know Palestinian geography it was not important to 
state exactly the location of each place. This does not 
agree well with the author’s care not to allow any at- 
mosphere of vagueness or uncertainty to cloud his picture. 


110 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


He localizes his incident carefully. Yet he is not writing 
for a map maker. It is often more important in reading 
this Gospel to note the sound and significance of the name 
given of a location rather than try to find it on the map. 
For example, in the next chapter he localizes his narra- 
tive by saying that it was ‘‘near the parcel of ground 
that Jacob gave to his son Joseph,’’ an allusion introduced 
plainly for the sake of recalling the beauty of the old 
stories regarding Jacob and Joseph. So here (ili, 23) it 
may not be entirely beside the mark to note that Aenon is 
derived from the Hebrew word for ‘‘springs.’’ John was 
baptizing in a place ealled ‘‘The Springs.’’ ‘‘Salim’’ is 
allied to the Hebrew word which means ‘‘peace.’’ It is 
at least suggestively appropriate that the baptizing oc- 
eurred at ‘‘The Springs’’ ‘‘near’’ the place of ‘‘Peace’’ 
Cars ex, 2h). 

‘‘John had not yet been put in prison’’ (24). State- 
ments of this kind are of particular value for the under- 
standing of this Gospel. They assume a knowledge of the 
events of the ministry. If this Gospel had been written 
aS a consecutive narrative complete at each stage, there 
would be no place here for such a statement as this, for 
no imprisonment has been mentioned or will be mentioned. 
It is, instead, a selection of scenes out of the ministry. 
They suffice for our author’s different purpose, which is to 
write something above and beyond history. 

Verse 25 introduces the issue to be raised here, a ques- 
tioning on the part of John’s disciples with a Jew about 
purifying. In the synoptic gospels it is clearly stated that 
Jesus was not as elaborate in observance of ceremonial as 
the Baptist and the Pharisees. He was often criticized 
for his laxness in this respect. The question was a vital 
one in Ephesus. Both the Jewish synagogue and the 
church of John the Baptist emphasized the importance of 
washings and baptisms and fastings. Our spokesman of 
the Christian Gospel in Ephesus is out here, so to speak, 
to kill two birds with one stone. Both Jew and follower 


a 


Ch. 3, 22-36 Tue Sprrir WitHout MEASURE 111 


of the Baptist will be compelled to choose between dis- 
obeying their great prophet or questioning his veracity if 
John the Baptist is made the court of appeal and renders 
the verdict himself that Jesus is the one sent from heaven. 
Our author goes on to explain that in Jesus nothing counts 
except the gift of the spirit (84) and the eternal life that 
follows obedience to the commandments of Jesus (36). 
Verse 27 is in line with the Hellenistic popular philosophy 
that not a trace of the spirit can have its origin in the 
realm of the material. 

John himself, in verse 28, points again to Jesus (as in 
chapter i) and says again, ‘‘I am not the Christ.’’ Under 
the conditions at Ephesus it is plain that a spokesman of 
the Christian gospel would refer to that bit of evidence over 
and over again in his discourses. Verse 29 is an argu- 
ment in support of the position that Jesus, not John, is 
the one sent from God. It was an argument of immediate 
pertinence and power to his hearers. In fact, it has been 
a powerful argument in every age. ‘‘He that has the bride 
is the bridegroom.’’ Here is an example of the kind of 
vivid, unforgettable figure, that this Gospel often uses. 
To his Greek hearers, the Logos-Light and to his fellow 
Christians the Holy Spirit is the bride. The possession 
of the Spirit in the eyes of the Jew or his embodiment of 
the Logos-Light in the eyes of the Greek proves that Jesus, 
not John the Baptist, was sent from God to be the savior 
of men. That is reason enough and to spare why the 
Baptist should have said when the question was carried 
up to him as the final court of appeal, ‘‘He must become 
greater and greater but I less and less’’ (30). 

‘‘He who comes from above is above all’’ (31). The 
popular Stoic and Platonic dualism again supplies the 
background for the understanding of these words. Jesus 
is the incarnation of that beneficent reason, that divine 
Spirit, which has guided and directed all things in all 
ages. There is no door of exit for the Baptist, who is of 
the earth, into the realm of the Spirit. But there is a door 


112 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of ingress into the realm of the material from the realm 
of the Spirit and Jesus has found it. He comes qualified 
to ‘‘speak the words of God’’ (84). He comes qualified to 
“give the Spirit without measure.’’ The word ‘‘measure”’ 
is another suggestive cross reference. It is nearly the same 
word used as a measure in 11, 6. The over-generous quan- 
tity of the wine was a symbol of the prodigality of the 
Spirit. 

Verses 34-36 reveal the reason for placing this section 
(22-86) in close conjunction with the talk on the second 
birth. Nicodemus has much the same question in mind 
concerning purification as ‘‘the Jew’’ in verse 25, and 
both answers have recourse to the spirit in their explana- 
tions. The use of birth as a symbol corresponds to the 
similar use of bride (29). The work of the spirit in the 
Nicodemus story (5-8) is paralleled by the reference to 
its mediator in 34. The picture of the Judgment in 18, 
19 corresponds to ‘‘the wrath of God’’ (36). ‘‘He who 
lives the truth’’ in 21 parallels ‘‘he who believes on the 
Son’’ (386). 

‘‘The wrath of God’’ (36). This verse is a little 
apocalypse contrasting eternal life with the wrath of 
God. We almost feel that the author has turned away 
from his previous definition of judgment as we read the 
words and has reverted to the standpoint that at a future 
day God’s wrath will destroy the world and send sinners 
to everlasting punishment. But if we look more closely 
we see that this Gospel uses the old expression ‘‘the wrath 
of God’? with a new verb. The wrath of God for this 
Gospel is not an invasion of uncertain future date, but a 
prolongation of an existing condition. It ‘‘abides’’ where 
it is. Those who refuse to budge from the darkness to 
which they are accustomed when the light embodied in 
Jesus is offered to them continue, of course, to live their 
lives within the confines of the material. That, in itself, 
is equivalent, for this Gospel, to the wrath of God settling 
down to abide upon them indefinitely. On the other hand, 


Ch. 3, 22-36 Tue Spirir WITHOUT MEASURE 113 


those who accept the offer of the light embodied in Jesus 
are empowered by it to climb out of the realm of the 
material and take up their permanent residence in the realm 
of the spirit. 


CHAPTER VIII 


THE WATER OF LIFE 
JOHN IV 


iv, 5. Jesus comes to a city in Samaria, called Sychar, 
near the piece of land that Jacob gave to his son Joseph: 
6. and Jacob’s well was there. Jesus, tired with his 
journey, was sitting by the spring. It was about noon. 
7. A woman of Samaria comes to draw water. Jesus 
says to her, Give me a drink. 8. For his disciples had 
gone into the city to buy food. The Samaritan woman 
says to him, How comes it that you who are a Jew ask 
for a drink from a Samaritan woman like me? 10. 
Jesus answered, If you knew of the gift of God, and who 
it is that says to you, Give me a drink; you would have 
asked him, and he would have given you living spring 
water. 11. The woman says, You have nothing to draw 
with, and the well is deep; where can you get the living 
spring water? 13. Jesus answered, Any one who drinks 
this water will be thirsty again: 14. but any one who 
drinks the water that I will give him will never thirst 
any more; but the water that I give him will become 
a spring of water within him surging up as a source of 
eternal life. 15. The woman says to him, Give me this 
water, Sir, so that I may never be thirsty, nor have 
to come all the way here to this well to draw water. 


In this chapter John’s talk is based again upon the very 


stuff out of which life on earth is made. Water is a daily 
necessity and the question of a good water supply will al- 
ways be a pressing one as long as earth lasts. A recent 
traveler in Palestine became rather intimately acquainted 


114 


Ch. 4, 1-15 THE WATER OF LIFE 115 


with an Arab boy of about twenty years of age. The 
young fellow one day found confidence to say that he would 
like to move to America. But before he made the final 
decision he felt that he must have the answer to two 
questions. One of them was, ‘‘How much do wives cost?’’ 
When told that prospective bridegrooms never had to pay 
a sum of money to the father of the bride in this country, 
the matter was practically settled that he would take the 
first opportunity of coming to such a promising land. But 
quickly a second thought and a second question came, 
‘“‘How much does water cost?’’ When told that there 
were free drinking fountains in the streets of our cities, 
his enthusiasm knew no bounds. America was the land of 
the blessed. The traveler feeling that he ought to know 
there were two sides to the question explained that the 
weather was sometimes so cold that it was necessary to 
find shelter at night. This proved to be such a mysterious 
terror to the young Arab that it took all the life out of 
his resolution. 

The incident serves to show that where enough good 
water to drink daily was to come from was a main problem 
in the mind of a resident of Palestine or Asia Minor. 
After how to get a wife his big problem is not that of 
shelter or of food, but how to obtain a proper supply of 
drinking water. In deserts and on semi-tropical plains, 
the problem of a supply of good drinking water is of far 
greater importance than any one accustomed to a more 
northern climate can easily realize. The order of subjects 
in our Gospel, therefore, is quite appropriate. Next after 
marriage, chapter ii, and birth, chapter lili, comes not a 
talk on the problem of obtaining the best food, chapter vi, 
or on the best physician, chapter v, but on the subject of 
where to obtain enough good water to drink. 

Serving as a background for the discourse is all the 
wealth of those legends of the ancient world which tell 
how men set out for distant lands in quest of the water of 


life. From prehistoric timespopular belief has_persisted 


116 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


that_ there exists somewhere a Fountain of Youth-ofwhieh 
‘@ man may drink and live forever. As recently as the 
days of colonization of the American continent, Ponce de 
Leon set out on his expeditions in the hope that he might 
find perhaps in Florida, perhaps elsewhere, that long- 
sought Fountain. What John in essence is in this chapter 
seeking to prove to the three classes of the unconverted with 
whom he had to deal, from Jesus’ own lips, is that Jesus-4s 
the fountain source of the spirit received_in.Christian_bap- 
tism whose thirst-quenching properties never give out 
because it is in continual flow like a living spring. 

John does not leave his story suspended in the air as 
far as place and scene are concerned. Jesus was near a 
city of Samaria called Sychar. He says that Sychar was 
near Jacob’s spring and near the pasture ground given 
to Joseph. Thus the author humanizes his narrative with 
living vital facts and atmosphere rather than with what 
he would have called dry geographical data. By a for- 
tunate accident of history Jacob’s well has been preserved 
and has been identified beyond question today. It is over 
100 feet.deep. But our author’s interest was engrossed 
in giving vividness and definiteness to his narrative for 
those who would never visit Palestine nor ever see a map 
of that country. 

That Jesus should be sitting by the well at the noon 
hour while his disciples had all gone together into the city 

or food was quite natural. They would need the pro- 
tection of numbers in the city. The people of the city 

| located today near Jacob’s well, Nablus by name,_still 
| maintain the old reputation for acute hostility toward out- 
\ siders. Travelers often have very unpleasant experiences 
‘there. 

The request of Jesus, ‘‘Give me a drink,’’ makes a very 
innocent point of departure. John’s method was like Jesus’ 
own—to start with a very simple statement acceptable to 
all within hearing and then lead his listeners slowly, 
steadily along an upward course. His Greek hearers in 


Ch. 4, 1-15 THE WATER OF LIFE 117 


Ephesus would not fail to note that this Samaritan woman 
was as much a foreigner in Jewish estimation as they them- 
selves. Nor would this present Christian preacher fail to 
bring out the proof contained therein that Jesus was as 
willing to confer his spirit with its peculiar thirst-quench- 
ing properties that never give out upon all applicants, 
whether they formerly belonged to old-line Judaism, to 
the sect of the Baptist, or to some school of Greek philos- 
ophy. 

For the answer of Jesus contains the same use of a 
phrase of double meaning, one on the surface and the other 
underneath, which we found in the story of Nicodemus. 
It is our author’s favorite way of crossing the bridge with 
his audience from the physical to the spiritual. By this 
means the physical becomes a symbol of the spiritual. 

The woman objects that Jesus has no means of drawing 
up the water from the depths of the well. The misunder- 
standing involved in her question corresponds closely to 
the one in Nicodemus’ question in iii, 4, ‘‘How can a man 
be born when he is old?’’ In both cases the question 
saves our Ephesian preacher from implying that his lis- 
teners are too dull to see the point unless he goes on to 
explain Jesus’ meaning to them. 

The explanation of Jesus, ‘‘Any one who drinks this 
water will be thirsty again,’’ parallels his word to Nico- 
demus, ‘‘ What is born of the flesh is flesh.’’ ‘‘A spring 
of water surging up into eternal life’’ is the continuing 
parallel to ‘‘born of the spirit’’ and ‘‘eternal life’’ in chap- 
ter ili. It stirs up in the woman’s mind the picture of 
a spring bubbling up in her own yard which would assuage 
her thirst at will in all the baking heat of the hottest 
summer day, give refreshment, and save her from the 
tedious daily journey to the well which is the scene of the 
conversation. 

As death unto life—no break less sharp—is the old life 
compared to the new is the message preached by the 
spokesman of the Christian gospel to his hearers in Ephesus 


118 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


by means of the Nicodemus story. He makes that com- 
parison the vestibule to his answer to the question of the 
inquirers among his rearers—with what initiation is the 
man desirous of joining your Christian circle initiated into 
membership therein? John returns the obvious answer 
that the only bridge from death to life is the bridge of 
birth and that with the gift of the Spirit a man dies out 
of the realm to which the flesh belongs and is born into the 
realm of the Spirit. 

As a prospective settler, the young Arab asked among 
his first questions of the American traveler: Have you 
eood drinking water in yeur country and how hard is it 
to obtain? After he had satisfied himself in regard to the 
mode of initiation, the same two questions would be apt 
to be the next ones asked by an inquirer in Ephesus con- 
cerning the Christian way of life. 

As a drink which is really thirst-quenching compared to 
one that is deceivingly so,—such is the contrast between 
the old and the new, and by no comparison less extreme 
ean the difference in quality be indicated. As a well an 
hundred feet deep to a living spring over which a man 
ean stoop and drink his fill—such is the difficulty in the 
old world to which the flesh-born belong, compared to the 
ease of obtaining in the new world in which the spirit-born 
reside. These are the answers of the gospel according to 
John to the questions of the Ephesian searcher after the 
larger life. 


GOD IS SPIRIT 
JOHN Iv, 16-45 


16. Jesus says to her, Go, call your husband. 17. The 
woman answered, I have no husband. Jesus says to her, 
You are right in saying, I have no husband: 18. for you 
have had five husbands; and the man with whom you are 
now living is not your husband. 

21. The time is coming when it will be neither on 


Ch. 4, 16-45 Gop Is Spirit 119 


this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, that you will worship 
the Father. 22. You worship what you do not know. 
We know what we worship. 23. The time is coming— 
and that time has now arrived—when the true worship- 
ers will worship the Father in spirit with sincerity: 
for such are the worshipers whom the Father seeks for 
his own. 24. God is Spirit: and those who worship him 
ought to worship spiritually. 

32. I have food to eat of which you do not know. 
34, My food is to do the will of him who sent me, and 
to complete his work. 35. Look at the fields! They are 
white already for harvest. 387. One sows, and another 
reaps. 388. Others have labored, and you have entered 
upon the results of their labor. 

39. Many of the Samaritans came to believe in Jesus 
because of what the woman told. 40. And he stayed 
there two days. 41. And many more came to believe 
because of Jesus’ own words; 42. and they said to the 
woman, Now we believe in him not because of what you 
have told, but because we have heard him ourselves, and 
we know that he really is the savior of the world. 

43. When the two days were over he went on into 
Galilee. 44. For Jesus himself was a witness to the 
saying that a prophet has no honor in his own country. 
45. So when he came into Galilee, the Galileans wel- 
comed him, for they had seen all that he did at Jeru- 
salem during the festival; for they, too, went to the 
festival. 


Verses 16 and following recall how Jesus told Nathanael 
he saw him under the fig tree and how he knew him well 
although he (Jesus) had never met him nor been told any- 
thing about him. So here, Jesus is said to know the inmost 
life of this woman whom he had never met before. The 
sun may be said to have free passage-way to whatever point 
its beams in their meandering may travel. So, Jesus as the 
embodiment of the Logos-Light that lighteth every man 


120 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


that cometh into the world, John says, can follow that 
light in all its travels and, therefore, every man’s interior 
history is an open book to him. Both Nathanael and the 
woman at the well made the great surrender to Jesus after 
one such proof of this supreme gift of insight as did 
many of the Samaritans of her city, hearing of it at second 
hand from her, simply because they believed that she was 
telling the truth. The attempt has been made to find an 
allegorical application of the reference in verse 18 to the 
‘‘five husbands.’’ Westcott suggests that it might refer 
to the five epochs into which Samaritan religious history 
divides. Only in the case of special terms, however, such 
as ‘‘living water’’ and ‘‘second birth,’’ does John have 
symbols clearly in mind. Elsewhere the narrative in gen- 
eral is to be taken literally, always, however, with special 
reference to its Ephesian setting. The woman is not an 
allegorical figure. She is a real woman in John’s narra- 
tive. 

The chapter is full of applications that fit the Ephesian 
situation like a glove. ‘‘The time is coming when it will 
be neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, that you 
will worship the Father’’ (21). Today, this word of Jesus 
was fulfilled in their sight and hearing in Ephesus. Since 
the words were spoken, Jerusalem had been destroyed and 
its Temple form of worship with it. Ephesus has already 
begun to take advantage of the new order of worship 
of the Father in spirit and in truth. ‘‘You worship what 
you do not know’’ or ‘‘ You worship the Unknown’’ (22) 
reminds us of the altar ‘‘to an unknown god’’ (Acts xvii, 
23). It was plain speaking, but his conscience would not 
let him do less for those in his audience belonging to 
the three classes of the unconverted, none of which knew 
God in Christ. In verse 23, ‘‘ And that time has now ar- 
rived’’ was probably spoken, therefore, by John with con- 
siderable emphasis. In every case in this Gospel where 
the phrase usually translated ‘‘and now is’’ occurs, it 
voices a conviction spoken by the author with a gesture 


Ch. 4, 16-45 Gop Is Spirit 121 


to indicate that it applied to conditions existing in Ephesus 
at the moment of speaking. 

Many other verses should be read in the light of a similar 
Ephesian application. ‘‘Look at the fields! They are 
white already for harvest’’ (85). There is a world of 
Christian work to do here in Ephesus and more of it would 
get done if our own members were more consecrated. 

‘One sows and another reaps’’ (37) reminds one of 
Paul’s words, ‘‘I planted, Apollos watered.’’ Paul la- 
bored three years in Ephesus; ‘‘Others have labored and 
you have entered upon the results of their labor’’ (38). 
Similarly, verse 42 is full of local Ephesian meaning. 
Non-believers were first brought to the Christian church 
and so to a knowledge of Christ by personal effort and 
persuasion on the part of its membership. But after they 
had come to know Christ in baptism in the power of the 
Spirit, that former hearsay knowledge lost all its flavor. 
‘‘Now we believe, not because of what you have told; but 
because we have heard [experienced] ourselves and know 
that he is the savior of the world’’ (42). 

As our farewell to the story of the Water of Life it 
should be noted that the mention of unknown ‘‘food’’ in 
verse 32 constitutes a cross reference to chapter vi. These 
cross references are a vital part of the Gospel. The use 
of the word ‘‘food’’ in a double sense of the physical for 
a symbol of the spiritual in this chapter on the Water of 
Life prepares us for a religious understanding of the nar- 
rative of the feeding of the multitude and of the talk on 
the Bread of Life which is soon to follow. ‘‘I have food 
of which you do not know’’ (382). 

‘When the two days were over,’’ or ‘‘ After the two 
days’’ (43) indicates the ending of one address and the 
beginning of another sheet of notes for a new talk. We 
may expect the rest of the chapter to present a different 
scene and a different physical symbol for teaching over 
again the same fundamental Christian truth. 

‘‘A prophet has no honor in his own country. So when 


122 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


he came into Galilee the Galileans welcomed him’’ (45). 
The statement has occasioned discussion without end as to 
whether the author regarded Judea or Galilee as Jesus’ 
‘‘own country.’’ We have to remember that more than 
three-quarters of what takes place in the fourth gospel 
takes place in Judea. The author himself was plainly 
completely at home in Jerusalem; little, if at all, in Galilee. 
Modern commentators are fairly well agreed that by ‘‘own 
ecountry’’ in this passage this Gospel means Judea. ‘‘It 
seems impossible that [the Gospel of] John should speak 
of Galilee in this connection as Christ’s ‘own country.’ 
Both by fact and by the current interpretation of prophecy, 
Judea alone could receive that title.’’* There is no doubt 
that the contrary application is given to this proverb in 
Luke iv, 24: ‘‘No prophet is acceptable in his own coun- 
try.’’ Plainly in Luke Nazareth is Jesus’ ‘‘own country,”’ 
though Luke also distinguishes in this regard between 
Capernaum and Nazareth. 

Again the solution of the conflicting statements becomes 
easy for one who takes his stand in Ephesus. Paul’s preach- 
ing there had been almost entirely confined to the death 
and resurrection of Jesus, which necessitated no mention 
of Galilee at all. John’s Gospel shows some tendency in 
the same direction. The reason is plain: in Ephesus much 
was known of Judea and Jerusalem, little of Galilee. Old 
Testament prophecy, in regard to the Messiah, also, cen- 
tered around David’s ancestral home in Bethlehem and 
Jerusalem. To an Ephesian audience Jerusalem and Judea 
as Jesus’ ‘‘own country’’ would mean something, while 
Galilee would be to them nothing more than an unfamiliar 
name. 

HEALING AT A DISTANCE 


JOHN Iv, 46-54 
46. He came again to Cana in Galilee, where he had 
turned the water into wine. And there was a govern- 
1 Westcott. 


Ch. 4, 46-54 HEALING AT A DISTANCE To 


ment official whose son was lying sick at Capernaum. 
47. He went to Jesus and begged him to come down and 
eure his son; for he was at the point of death. 48. 
Jesus said, ‘‘Unless you see signs and wonders, you will 
not believe. 49. The official says, ‘‘Come down, Sir, 
before my child dies. 50. Jesus says to him, Go on 
your way; your son is going to live. The man believed 
the word of Jesus and went on his way. 51. And while 
he was going down, his servants met him and told him 
that his son was living. 52. He asked at what time he 
began to get better. They said, Yesterday at one o’clock 
the fever left him. 53. So the father knew that it was 
at the same hour when Jesus had said to him, Your son 
will live; and he himself put his faith in Jesus—he and 
his whole household. 54. This second sign Jesus showed 
after coming from Judea to Galilee. 


Verses 46-54 supply the new narrative which verse 43 
led us to expect. The progress of the chapter up to this 
point creates an atmosphere of keen anticipation. The 
knowledge of her past possessed by this stranger caused 
the woman at the well to believe in him. We naturally 
look in the present section for still another episode as 
powerfully suggestive. To heighten our sense of antici- 
pation we are told at the outset that this incident occurred 
at the place where Jesus made the water wine. 

The narrative begins with the request of the official that 
Jesus should come down and ‘‘cure’’ his son. The verb 
translated here as cure or heal is from the same root as 
our noun, physician. Jesus is the great physician. ‘‘ Physi- 
cian heal thyself’’ (Luk. iv, 23). ‘‘The strong have no 
need of a physician’’ (Mar. ii, 17; Mat. ix, 12; Luk. v, 31). 

Twice the author uses the word ‘‘sign’’ of this incident 
(48, 54) to denote its extraordinary significance. In verse 
48 the meaning of the word ‘‘wonder’’ is a supernatural 
. event. The verse referred on the occasion on which it was 
uttered to the desire of the Jews to see staggering impossi- 


124 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


bilities done before their eyes, but at the time and place 
this Gospel used it, it referred to a similar Ephesian itch 
to hear an account of how they were done. The author 
faced an audience which was more ready to listen to those 
who would tell them wonder stories than to one who ealled 
upon them to satisfy the conditions and obtain the gift of 
eternal life. In 46-54, the author yields this time to the 
popular demand for a story of a ‘‘wonder.’’ In compari- 
son with other religions of the first century Christianity 
was decidedly reserved in the use of miracle stories 
(‘‘Zurtickhaltend in der Erzihlung von Wundern’’).* In 
the main, all three principal divisions of the New Testa- 
ment, the Synoptic Gospels, the Epistles of Paul and the 
present Gospel express the same sentiment against ‘*‘won- 
ders.’ 

It is noticeable that the author nowhere speaks against 
‘*signs’’ in themselves. The emphasis of the rebuke here in 
iv, 48, is upon the ‘‘wonders,’’ just as in the case of the 
phrase in iil, 5, ‘‘Water and Spirit,’’ the emphasis was 
upon the ‘‘Spirit.’’ Wherever the author uses words in 
these pairs, it is the second member to which he is calling 
principal attention. The verse iv, 48, might be para- 
phrased thus: ‘‘Unless the signs of Jesus’ power are set 
before you in the shape of wonder stories, you will not 
believe.’’? The principal concern of the author when he 
tells a wonder story is that his listeners shall fasten their 
attention upon its “‘significance’’ understood as a symbol 
of the spiritual power at work in Ephesus giving proof 
that Jesus is Son of God. See comments on vi, 26. 

Another suggestion of the spiritual under-meaning of 
the narrative may be found in the word ‘‘dies’’ (49) and 
in the contrasting term ‘‘lives’’ (50). After the brief 
introductory statement that the boy was sick and that the 
father wished him to be healed, the vocabulary of illness 
is dropped. Of course, the father continued to be inter- 
ested mainly in the healing of his son. But when we re- - 

2 Cf., Deissmann, Licht vom Osten, 4th ed., IV, 11, p. 330. 


Ch. 4, 46-54 HEALING AT A DISTANCE 125 


member that the central antithesis in which our Gospel 
is interested is more often expressed in the alternatives, 
‘‘death’’ or ‘‘life,’’ than in any other terms the appropri- 
ateness of the wording of this narrative becomes evident. 
Verse 50 again is a pattern of our author’s Ephesian 
gospel of belief and obedience. Jesus commanded, ‘‘Go on 
your way’’ and because he believed in Jesus’ assurance 
that his son was to live, the man obeyed, ‘‘and he went 
on his way.”’ 

Perception when not present in person is remarkable 
(as in the case of Nathanael under the fig tree). How much 
more wonderful is perception when not present in person 
across a distance of time (as in the case of the woman at 
the well) stretching into years. 

If these things be wonderful, what shall we say not 
of perception but of action, when not present in person, 
as in the case of this nobleman’s son, sufficiently effective 
over miles of intervening space to heal a human being 
at the point of death? Because, when put to the test, 
Jesus’ assurance that his son would live was vindicated, 
this nobleman, then and not before, believed on Jesus, he 
and his whole house, and they were all saved. 

The Ephesian application is clear. Your life, which is as 
dear to you as the life of an only son to his father, is 
perishing. Indeed, your life in the realm of the material 
has never been, and can never be, much more than a living 
death. Accept, like this nobleman, Jesus’ assurance that 
your soul shall live—put it to the test and the event will 
vindicate him and persuade you to ‘‘believe on Jesus’’ and 
thus be born again and take up your abode in the realm of 
the spirit. Time and space constitute no barriers to him 
nor to the lifesaving work of his power. 


CHAPTER IX 


THE HEALING OF THE MAN AT THE POOL 
JOHN V 


v, 1. After this there was a festival of the Jews, 
and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2. There is in Jeru- 
salem near the Sheep Gate a pool, called in Hebrew 
Bethzatha, which has five porches. 38. In these there 
were lying numerous people who were sick, blind, lame, 
or paralyzed. 5. One man was there, who had been 
afflicted for thirty-eight years. 6. Jesus sees him lying 
there, and says to him, Do you wish to become a healthy 
man? 7. The afflicted one answered, I have no one, Sir, 
to put me into the pool when there is a stirring of the 
water. 8. Jesus says to him, Rise, take up your mat, 
and walk. 9. And immediately he became a healthy 
man, and took up his mat and began to walk. 


The lack of chronological and geographical contin ity 
in this Gospel has always been noticed by students. Of 
all the particular readjustments proposed, the one most 
often defended is that which places chapter vi between 
chapters iv and v. The reason for making this rearrange- 
ment is that the first verse of chapter vi states that Jesus 
crossed to the other side of the sea of Galilee. In chapter 
iv Jesus is on the proper side from which to make the 
above journey, 7.e., in Capernaum or rather in Cana (iv, 
46); while at the end of chapter v Jesus is in Judea. If 
chapter vi followed chapter iv this apparent geographical 
slip would disappear. Our main interest in this rear- 
rangement, however, is that it makes the chapter on the 

126 


Ch. 5, 1-9 THE HEALING OF THE MAN AT THE POOL 127 


Bread of Life follow the chapter on the Water of Life, 
for that sequence seems to be more in line with our idea 
of a topical order of chapters. 

Adopt the view that the Gospel is a collection of sep- 
arate talks or of notes for those talks, and all such read- 
justments to correct geographical conflicts become unnec- 
essary. Starting an independent talk with the statement 
of vi, 1, that he went to the other side of the sea simply 
means, then, that since the thread of connection with the 
episode preceding in Jesus’ biography has no bearing on 
the speaker’s present purpose he does not stop to explain. 
To begin a talk as in v, 1, ‘‘There was a festival of the 
Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,’’ would also be 
equally right and proper. 

But the present order of chapters or talks is also the 
natural order of topics to be expected, if due weight be 
given to conditions in the country in which the Gospel was 
written. In Asia Minor disease is as great if not a greater 
menace to life than lack of food. After the talk on an 
adequate drinking supply there might follow either a talk 
on an adequate food supply or one on adequate protection 
against ill health. It is not unlikely that a popular Ephe- 
sian audience would give a discourse on ill health and its 
cure precedence over a talk on food. This explanation also 
draws iv, 46-54, which is likewise a narrative of healing, 
into the picture. In an arrangement of the material used 
in these talks by subjects, the two cures naturally belong 
together as we have them. The symbolism is the same in 
the healing of the ‘‘nobleman’s’’ son and in the present 
narrative. 

‘‘By the Sheep Gate’’ is another illustration of the 
fugitive character of the topography of this Gospel. We 
know definitely of no gate bearing this name in the time 
of Jesus. But a gate of this name is mentioned in the 
Old Testament (Neh. iii, 1). 

“A pool called Bethzatha.’’ ‘‘Bethesda,’’ the ordinary 
English reading, means: literally house of mercy. The cor- 


128 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


rect manuscript reading seems to be Bethzatha, which prob- 
ably means house of the olive. 

Like the preceding narratives, this story undoubtedly 
rests on an historical basis. Scientific study makes it ap- 
parent that Jesus could and did perform such remarkable 
eures. Moreover, there is nothing in the narrative of the 
eure (v, 1-9) which may not be the record of an eye- 
witness. If the writer was not personally present, in this 
narrative, as in some other of his stories, he had access to 
faithful Christian tradition concerning Jesus. 

The chief difference between these two cases of healing 
is that in the former the word of Jesus had lost none of 
its power after traveling across miles of space to act for 
him in his absence, while in this case it overcame the deadly 
work of thirty-eight long years of illness mentioned as 
proof that the disease was beyond any ordinary hope of 
‘eure. Singling out, perhaps, the worst case among the 
‘‘oreat number of people who were sick, blind, lame 
or paralyzed’’ (3) is meant to indicate that his power to 
heal him proves that it is able to heal any one in any 
state. A 

‘‘One man, who had been afflicted thirty-eight years.”’ 
People had ceased to notice him. In that ancient day 
the number forty was indicative of interminableness. The 
children of Israel were forty years, an interminable time, 
in the wilderness. Jesus was tempted forty days. The idea 
sought to be conveyed is that if Jesus could withstand forty 
days of temptation he could withstand it forever. The 
man in the present story had been the victim of his afflic- 
tion almost the limit of time. This fact is the main item. 
Nothing is said about the nature of his infirmity. It does 
not matter. Regardless of its nature, Jesus asks his ques- 
tion, Do you wish to become a healthy man? Note also 
that the man is cured without being touched and without 
the use of gestures or formulae such as are mentioned in 
the Gospel of Mark (Mar. vii, 32-34; viii, 22-25). 


Ch. 5, 9-17 THE OBJECTION OF THE JEWS . 129 


THE OBJECTION OF THE JEWS 
JOHN V, 9-17 


v, 9. Now it was the Sabbath day. 10. So the Jews 
said, It is against the law for you to carry your mat. 
11. He answered, The man who cured me said to me, 
Take up your mat and walk. 12. They asked him, Who 
is the man? 13. But he did not know, for Jesus had 
gone away. 14. Afterward, Jesus finds him in the Tem- 
ple, and he said to him, See, you are a healthy man now; 
sin no more, or something worse may befall you. 15. 
The man told the Jews that it was Jesus who had cured 
him. 16. This was why the Jews persecuted Jesus, 
because he used to do things like this on the Sabbath. 
17. But Jesus answered, My Father is still at work, and 
I work also. 


In the first decades of Christian history the disciples of 
Jesus kept the Sabbath day with practically the same care 
as the Jews. Now, only a few Christians are left who think 
of observing the Jewish Sabbath in any way. For us the 
Christian Sunday has taken its place. In all probability 
this falling off in the observance of the Jewish Sabbath 
reached its climax in Ephesus during the ministry of our 
author. Probably he could look back to a time when Chris- 
tians still endeavored to observe the Sabbath. But it be- 
came more and more impracticable in Ephesus for the 
Christians, who were for the most part working people, 
to observe the day, since the Roman Empire decreed a legal 
holiday perhaps every fifth or sixth day in the year in 
celebration of the anniversary of some battle or imperial 
accession. 

John probably took the bold stand on this question that 
_ since the Roman civic holidays gave them their one day’s 
rest in seven, slaves and day laborers, as most Ephesian 
Christians were, with their keep to earn, could not be ex- 


130 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


pected to observe any regular day. A man or woman 
might, therefore, even go about his work on the Jewish 
Sabbath, if necessary, as on any other day. As for the 
continued observance of the multifarious restrictions that 
had grown up about the day in old-line Judaism, we may 
well believe that John would say to his Ephesian hearers 
that these did not need to be observed at all. In answer 
to the objection that the Scripture says that God rested 
the seventh day (Gen. il, 2; Ex. xx, 11) our author 
ean cite Jesus’ attitude, and say further that, as far as 
works of mercy and necessity are concerned, God works 
on the seventh day as on other days. Jesus answered them, 
‘My Father is still at work and I work also’’ (17). This 
whole narrative is in line with the attitude that the synoptic 
gospels declare was taken by Jesus at the time of his 
healing of the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath 
(Mar. iii, 2) and with his saying that ‘‘The Sabbath was 
made for man, and not man for the Sabbath’’ (Mar. ii, 27). 

Another subject of importance is brought up in verse 
14. ‘‘Sin no more, or something worse may befall you.”’ 
The statement need by no means be taken as applying 
beyond this particular case. Some sins write themselves 
disastrously in the body of the sinner. Not all disease, 
however, is due to the handwriting of sin. The explanation 
is sometimes given that the ancients always assumed that 
physical sickness was the punishment inflicted of God for 
sin. But to ascribe such a belief to our author in his 
enlightened Hellenistic environment (especially in view of 
ix, 3, ‘‘neither did this man sin nor his parents’’) is to 
go too far. 

‘Or something worse may befall you.’’ The words are 
in line with the celebrated verse of II Peter (ii, 20), ‘‘If 
after they have escaped the defilements of the world... 
they are again entangled . . . the last state is become worse 
than the first. For it were better for them not to have 
known the way of righteousness. ’’ 

Each episode in the life of Jesus introduced thus far 


Ch. 5, 20-29 THE AWAKENING OF THE DEAD 131 


into this Gospel has been told first for its own sake and 
then for the convert-making material that can be extracted 
from it. The present instance is no exception. Verses 17 
and 18 mark the line of division. Jesus’ extraordinary de- 
fense of his act of healing on the Sabbath that he is only 
doing what his Father is doing and the retort of the Jews 
that in referring to God as ‘‘my Father’’ he had made him- 
self equal with God prepare the way for the expository 
use to be made of the present episode. 


THE AWAKENING OF THE DEAD 
JOHN v, 20-29 


v, 20. The Father loves his Son and shows him every- 
thing that he is doing: and he will show greater works 
than these to make you wonder. 21. For, as the Father 
raises the dead and gives them life, just so the Son 
also gives life to whom he will. 22. The Father does 
not judge any man, but he has entrusted all judgment 
to the Son. 24. He who listens to my word and believes 
him who sent me, has eternal life, and does not come 
to any judgment, but has already passed out of death 
into life. 25. The hour is coming, and is now present, 
when those who are dead will listen to the voice of the 
Son of God, and those who listen will live. 26. As the 
Father has inherent life within him, just so he has 
granted to the Son also to have life within him. 28. Do 
not wonder at this saying, that the hour is coming when 
all who are in their graves will hear his voice, 29. and 
will come forth; those who have done good, to a resur- 
rection of life; and those who have done evil, to a 
resurrection of judgment. 


This spokesman of the Christian gospel in Ephesus is 
looking at this incident from a distance of a half century. 
He cannot forget nor overlook what God hath wrought in 
those fifty years. He cannot, if he would, look at this cure 
through the eyes of a spectator on the spot when it oc- 


132 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


curred. The most jealous living guardian of the miracles 
of Jesus among us cannot set them beside what God hath 
wrought in these intervening nineteen Christian centuries 
and hesitate in his judgment as to which is the greater and 
which the lesser series of wonders. 

Moreover, for this Gospel, both disease and cure as they 
affect the body occur within the realm of flesh and the 
least transaction in the realm of the spirit is far more 
momentous than the greatest event that ever occurred 
in the realm of the material. 

‘‘And he will show greater works than these to make 
you wonder.’’ The intervening fifty years have put that 
statement to the proof for the Christians of Ephesus and 
in their judgment it has come through triumphantly. Men 
like themselves in increasing numbers have been convoyed 
by the holy spirit, received in Christian baptism, from a 
living death in the realm of the material into participation 
in the eternal life that goes on in the realm of the spirit. 

Thus is the way prepared for the author to present his 
attitude toward the apocalyptic dreams of his day. Prophe- 
cies were current to the effect that the world would be 
suddenly changed. On some future day the graves will 
literally give up their dead; there will be a physical resur- 
rection of both good and wicked; there will be a great judg- 
ment, the wrath of God will be let loose upon evil, the 
righteous will enter into life eternal. Studiously abstain- 
ing from passing on these claims and carefully refraining 
from making any predictions of his own, John neverthe- 
less extracts from all this imagery messages of immediate 
practical religious significance for his hearers. All these 
things have been fulfilled and are being fulfilled every 
day in their deepest spiritual sense before their eyes. 

Readers of this book will perhaps ask at this point: Are 
we reading these words as the words of John or the words 
of Jesus? This question will be faced more fully in deal- 
ing with chapter x and chapters xv to xvii. But the 
modern point of view in regard to this problem may be 


Ch. 5, 20-29 THE AWAKENING OF THE DEAD 133 


indicated here in four brief statements. (1) As noted in 
the ease of the Nicodemus story, this Gospel does not always 
make unambiguously clear where Jesus’ words end and the 
author’s own words begin. Verse 19 in chapter v reads, 
‘‘Jesus said.’’ But the verses that follow after verse 19 
(20-29) may very well be the author’s own. Jesus is 
spoken of in them in the third person. There is no indi- 
cation anywhere that Jesus is speaking except in the 
phrase ‘‘my word’’ in verse 24 and that ‘‘my’’ may just 
possibly refer to the author himself. (2) The talks con- 
tained in the Gospel of John were given from fifty to 
seventy years after Jesus’ ministry. There is no sufficient 
reason for thinking that these particular words belong to 
any earlier date. (8) The very best ancient historians, 
Thucydides, Xenophon and others, put the hortatory 
speeches in time of battle, which they narrate, into the 
mouths of the generals in command, composing those ad- 
dresses themselves to fit the occasion, and their readers 
all understood what they were doing and never mistook 
their word for the verbatim report of a speech actually 
delivered on the eve of that battle by the general in ques- 
tion. (4) The spokesmen of the great religions of the 
first century followed the same practice, using their own 
words but representing them, by their use of the first 
person, to be the sentiments of their founders or deities 
and all their readers or listeners understood they were 
doing it and none of them were deceived. The same thing 
is done in substance every Sunday in every pulpit in the 
land; only it is done in the third person and not in the 
first. See, also, the section on the ‘‘I’’ style in our chapter 
on the Popular Quality of the Gospel. 

The simplest receipt for reading such words aright in 
modern times is to bear this practice in mind. The reader 
must supply some such statement as: ‘‘Now if Jesus were 
speaking here in Ephesus today, this is how, in my judg- 
ment, he would address you,’’ or :‘Mark or Matthew give 
a good idea of how Jesus talked to Jews. But to an audi- 


134 Tuer GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ence of Gentiles and especially if he were sending a mes- 
sage straight to Ephesus, this, I am firmly persuaded, would 
be the burden of what he would have said:...’’ This 
Gospel is composed of the sermon materials of a master 
preacher at work interpreting Jesus to the people of 
Ephesus and so to the rest of the world. These verses 
under consideration here ring true to many sayings of 
Jesus in the synoptic gospels. ‘‘The kingdom of heaven 
is like a mustard seed.’’ ‘‘The kingdom is like leaven.’’ 
‘‘The kingdom comes not with observation.’’ 

The ‘‘greater works’’ of verse 20 (cf., ‘‘greater things, ’’ 
i, 50) refer to the works performed by the power of the 
spirit in Ephesus; John regarded these spiritual wonders 
as far, far greater marvels than all the wonders put to- 
gether that had ever been done in the realm of the material. 
Belief in him (Jesus) was giving ‘‘life’’ (verse 21) and 
opening heaven (1, 51) to many a man and woman dur- 
ing John’s ministry. It was this gift of eternal life to 
increasing numbers which he identifies as the ‘‘greater 
works.’’ 

‘‘As the Father raises the dead and gives them life.’’ 
In this verse is the first, unobtrusive hint of the convert- 
making meaning to be extracted by this Gospel from the 
words ‘‘dead’’ and ‘‘life’’ and ‘‘resurrection.’’ In the 
synoptic gospels, even, we note that Jesus used the word 
“‘dead’’ in a double sense: ‘‘Let the dead bury their 
dead.’’ But all the wealth of figurative usage of these 
words in Paul’s letters is back of their use here (Rom. vi, 
11; Col. ii, 18). For the Fourth Gospel the word ‘‘dead”’ 
catalogues all those who dwell in the realm of the material 
as belonging to the dead (cf., I Tim. v, 6) ; the word ‘‘life’’ 
means primarily the grade of life, to which it gives the 
name eternal, that believers have through Jesus, and ‘‘res- 
urrection’’ is its term for the experience of escaping from 
the former living death into the succeeding eternal life. 
‘‘He who listens to my word and believes in him who sent 
me has eternal life and does not come to judgment’’ (24). 


Ch. 5, 20-29 THE AWAKENING OF THE DEAD 135 


The nature of the judgment (22) concerning which he 
is pronounced ‘‘not guilty’’ without even being brought 
into court has been described in ili, 19. Judgment is the 
fate of those who turn their backs on the light and con- 
sists of living in the dark. Those who believe on Jesus 
(22, 24) need have no fear of a future judgment. In 
leaving the old life they have already passed out of its 
jurisdiction (contrast II Tim., ii, 18). 

In Ephesus the air was full of prophecies concerning 
the awakening of the dead on the day of the Lord by 
the voice of an angel or the sound of a trumpet. These 
expectations were based upon a literal acceptance of the 
imagery in the Book of Daniel and in other Jewish apoca- 
lypses. Even Paul in one passage takes notice of this 
“‘voice of the archangel’’ (I Thess. iv, 16). The words, 
‘The hour is coming when the dead will hear the voice of 
the Son of God’’ (25) should be understood, not as this 
Gospel’s own words, but as a quotation by it from some 
such current prophecy. Parallel to them are the words 
of Dan. xii, 2, ‘‘Many of those who sleep in the dust 
of the earth will awake, some to eternal life, and some to 
shame and eternal contempt.’’ In the midst of his reading 
or recital of the familiar prophecy (25), our author pauses, 
turns to his audience with an impressive gesture and adds 
as his own, the words ‘‘And is now present.’’ Thus he 
repeats what he has already told them, that this day of 
the Lord has arrived and Christian believers are living in 
it. Believers in Jesus, all of them, had ‘‘already passed 
out of death into life’’ (24). Compare Eph. ii, 4-6, 
‘““When we were dead through our trespasses,. .. God 
raised us up.’’ Col. ii, 12, ‘‘Having been buried... 
(Cf., ‘‘graves,’’? John v, 28) you were raised.’’ Similar 
wording is also used in Rom. vi, 4. 

‘‘Those who are in their graves will listen to his voice 
and will come forth’’ (28). The words remind us vividly 
of the story of Lazarus, which will be taken up and ex- 
plained later. They were generally regarded as a prophecy 


136 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of the wonders which shall take place at the inauguration 
of the Messianic age. This Gospel has explained, however, 
that these wonders are already taking place in the spiritual 
regeneration of lives in Ephesus. The introductory words, 
‘‘Do not wonder at this announcement that the carrying 
power of the voice of Jesus shall penetrate the ears of the 
dead in their graves,’’ might be paraphrased as ‘‘Do not 
misunderstand the nature of this prophecy.’’ Do not 
take it too literally. But yesterday you were equally be- 
wildered at the sight of men you had known for years 
rising up in the power of the spirit received in Christian 
baptism and departing from the grave in the realm of 
the material in which they had dwelt so long. No other 
means need be invoked—the same means that enabled Jesus 
to get a hearing in these more hopeless cases undoubtedly 
possess carrying power sufficient to penetrate the ears of 
a multitude of the long dead in their graves and will soon 
be doing so. It is the boldest spiritualization of apoca- 
lyptic imagery to be found in the entire Bible. 


THE HIGHEST TESTIMONY TO JESUS 
JOHN V, 31-47 


v, 31. If I bear testimony to myself, my testimony 
is not true. 32. It is another who bears testimony to 
me. 33. You yourselves sent to John, and he testified 
to the truth. 34. But the testimony which I receive is 
not from man. 36. The testimony which I have is 
greater than John’s; for the work that the Father has 
given me to accomplish, the work itself bears testimony 
to me. 

39. You search the Scriptures, because you think that 
in them you find eternal life; and these very Scriptures 
bear testimony to me. 46. If you believed Moses, you 
would believe me; for he wrote of me. 


Verses 31-47 are an illustration of the convert-making 
arguments used with inquirers in Ephesus belonging to 


Ch. 5, 31-47 Tue HicgHESt TESTIMONY TO JESUS 137 


old-line Judaism for believing that Jesus is the revela- 
tion of God and Savior of the world. 

Verse 31, ‘‘If I bear testimony to myself.’’ Do not 
take my word for it, says this spokesman of the Gospel 
in Ephesus. Let me stand aside and do you imagine it 
is my Master standing here in my place, using my tongue 
to plead his own case. He would say to you, also, if only 
I bear testimony to myself, do not believe me. But I 
can summon another to witness for me and I know this wit- 
ness is true. No, I do not now refer to John the Baptist. 
Your fathers sent to him once and he told them the truth 
concerning me. Only to help on your salvation, however, 
do I call John as a witness; for the years since John have 
- borne a greater witness to me beyond that of man. In the 
works of the Holy Spirit through these years the Father 
himself has borne witness of me. Your claim that his word 
and love are abiding in you is disproven by the fact that 
the voice of his word and love as it fell from my lips 
speaks thus far in an unknown tongue to you. Again your 
scriptures testify of me and yet in your search for eternal 
life in them you do not find me. Finally, here I am, and 
you will not come to me and in the power of the spirit 
received in Christian baptism obtain the eternal life which 
you profess to crave. It is the blind who lead the blind 
like themselves astray who come in their own name, but 
you make it the chief ground of my offense to you that I 
come in my Father’s name and ask you not to take my 
word for it, but point you to proofs beyond the power of 
man to its truth. I am speaking to you in sorrow and 
not in condemnation for, after all, if you will not believe 
your own scriptures which you profess to believe are your 
sacredest and most valuable possessions, how shall you 
believe my words? 

The relation of verses 30-47 to the preceding sections 
of this chapter becomes clear from the above point of 
view. The first section deals with a remarkable cure of 
a bodily infirmity (1-18). The second section sets forth 


138 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


a ‘‘ereater’’? (20) wonder than this cure of a bodily in- 
firmity, the new life of Christian believers. This third 
section (30-47) makes it plain that, for this Gospel, the 
new life of Christian believers constitutes the supreme 
proof that Jesus is the revelation of God and the Savior 
of the world. ‘‘Greater’’ in verse 36 harks back to and 
fills out the meaning of ‘‘greater’’ in verse 20, identifying 
the ‘‘work’’ (386) as the soul-saving spiritual wonders 
taking place in Ephesus and elsewhere. 

As in the ease of the dreams of the Apocalypses, he would 
have nothing to do with an attitude of sitting down with 
folded hands, waiting for a world cataclysm, so this spokes- 
man of the Christian gospel will not rest satisfied with 
any view of the wonders performed by Jesus in the flesh 
except those which can be put to convert-making uses with 
his parishioners in Ephesus. 


CHAPTER X 


THE BREAD OF LIFE 
JOHN VI 


vi, 1. After this Jesus crossed to the other side of 
the Sea of Galilee or the Sea of Tiberias. 2. And a 
ereat crowd followed him because they saw the signs 
which he showed in what he did for the sick. 4. Now 
the passover, the Jewish festival, was near. 5. Jesus, look- 
ing up and seeing that a great crowd was coming toward 
him, says to Philip, Where are we to buy bread for 
these people to eat? 6. He said this to test him: for 
he knew what he was going to do. 7%. Philip answered, 
Forty dollars’ worth of bread would not be enough for 
them each to have even a little. 8. Andrew says to 
him, 9. There is a boy here who has five barley loaves 
and two fish: but what is that among so many people? 
10. Jesus said, Make the people sit down. So the men 
numbering about five thousand sat down. 11. Jesus 
took the loaves; and, after giving thanks, he distributed 
them to those who were sitting down; and the same 
with the fish, as much as the people wanted. 12. And 
when they were filled, he says to his disciples, Collect 
the pieces that are left. 13. So they gathered them, and 
filled twelve baskets with pieces which were left from 
the five barley loaves. 14. When the people saw the 
signs which he showed, they said, This is certainly the 
Prophet who is to come into the world. 


This chapter on the ‘‘Bread of Life’’ comes close to 
the heart of the Fourth Gospel. Study of the book might 
139 


140 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


well begin with this narrative. All other portions might 
well be read in relation to it. For any one who has doubts 
as to the presence of symbolism in the stories of the 
Gospel, these doubts may best be faced and settled while 
reflecting upon these verses. 

One misfortune which has befallen the Gospel of John 
in modern days is that a disproportionate amount of time 
is often spent at the start on a detailed study of the pro- 
logue. This is done in an effort to find in that prologue 
the author’s whole metaphysical philosophy and his com- 
plete system of theology. Gardner remembers how in his 
course under Lightfoot ‘‘by the end of the term he had 
barely gone beyond the first few verses.’’* First impres- 
sions are hard to change. If a Bible student could begin 
his course on John with the sixth chapter and spend as 
much time upon that as the average course of study devotes 
to the prologue, he would obtain a much more wholesome 
and less confused impression. 

The chapter consists of a talk that John gave on com- 
munion day. Other early Christian teachers, following 
Paul (I Cor. xi, 23 ff.), on communion day told the story 
of Jesus’ last night upon earth and the details of his last 
supper with the disciples. In his deseription of Jesus’ 
last supper John ignores the formal instituting of a Lord’s 
Supper on that night, recorded in Paul and Luke. No 
such words are quoted by him as ‘‘ This do in remembrance 
of me.’’ John takes for his communion text the familiar 
story of the feeding of the multitude. He finds the story 
a symbol of a corresponding spiritual miracle. More than 
in any other chapter John is zealously solicitous that the 
incident shall be understood as a sign. The word “‘sign’’ 
occurs at constant intervals, in verse 2, again in verse 14, 
again in verse 26, again in verse 30. After verse 30 his 
unfolding of this internal significance has proceeded so 
far that he does not need to use the word further, but 
rises steadily from his base line statement of the com- 

1Gardner, p. 312. 


Ch. 6, 1-14 THE Breap or Lire 141 


munion service ‘‘Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of 
Man, you have not life’’ (53) to his spiritual climax in 
verse 63, ‘‘The flesh profits nothing; the words that I have 
spoken to you are spirit and are life.’’ 

His preference for the story of the feeding, instead of 
the events of the last night, as a communion day theme 
stands in close relation to John’s idea of the work of 
Christ. Some Christian leaders regarded the death of Jesus 
as his great work, the paying of a price for the forgiveness 
of sins. Others like Paul regarded the resurrection as the 
supreme event. But for John it was the incarnation, the 
revelation of the divine Spirit in Jesus, which was central. 
As has often been remarked, this Gospel more than once 
refers to Jesus’ work as “‘finished’’ before he died (Cf., 
xix, 28, and xix, 30). No understanding of the Christian 
religion would of course be complete without allowing 
many points of view to supplement one another. John’s 
contribution is to be sought in his own peculiar insistence 
that communion day means a receiving and partaking of 
the ‘‘spirit’’ and ‘‘life’’ (63) of Jesus, a nourishment of 
the inner life as a result of communion with Jesus. The 
purity and unselfishness of his life melt a way through 
our stiff minds and hard hearts for his Spirit to find en- 
trance and regenerate and rejuvenate and instill us with 
eternal life. 

The effectiveness of this talk and of John’s communion 
day symbolism in general hinges upon the fact that bread 
is such an undeniable daily necessity. In reply to the 
elaim that the Fourth Gospel is unduly metaphysical and 
theological, the answer is that the charge might be true 
of the people whom it is addressing, but that this spokes- 
man of the Christian gospel in Ephesus himself is inter- 
ested only in the immediately useful applications that can 
be extracted from these metaphysical and theological pre- 
occupations of his hearers. What plainer, more homely, 
more matter-of-fact statement could be made than that 
Jesus is the breakfast or supper of the soul. It requires 


142 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


no deep system of metaphysics to understand that as the 
body requires its daily food so the human spirit requires 
its appropriate daily sustenance. On the walls of the 
catacombs in Rome, no more frequent picture appears than 
that of the feeding of the multitude. It is plain that the 
imagery in these pictures is drawn from the Fourth Gospel 
with full appreciation of its symbolism. 

John has already invested the eating of bread, drinking 
of water, being born, being cured and other acts of daily 
life with a Christian atmosphere and flavor. No one in 
John’s circle of listeners could eat bread, take a drink 
of water, attend a wedding, or learn of a birth without 
being reminded of these talks and thus of Jesus and the 
new Christian way of life. Just as preaching, has better 
preaching ever been done? This method gave clearness and 
concreteness to his religious instruction. No one could fail 
to understand his meaning in the case of such terms as 
‘“bread,’’ ‘‘eat,’’ ‘‘satisfied,’’ ‘‘filled.’’ John has almost 
Biulone Jesus himself 4 in putting such vital everyday words 
and pictures to religious uses. 

Those familiar with the Markan account will notice, 
as the narrative of the feeding proceeds, one or two differ- 
ences. Verse 5 reports that Jesus was the one who first 
realized the hungry condition of the multitude (Cf., Mar. 
vi, 35). The physician is the first to notice the tell- 
tale signs of sickness. Another difference is in the man- 
ner of the distribution of the bread. No mention is made 
of the use of the disciples as waiters. The reading in the 
Authorized Version has been shown to be secondary. The 
correct reading for verse 11 is ‘‘He distributed to those 
who were sitting down.’’ Here again John is not pri- 
marily the story-teller engrossed in his tale; his eye is 
on the values that can be extracted from it for his hearers. 
He is first, last and all the time the evangelist with souls 
before him to save. 

That John, in making this use of the story, was not set- 
ting any new precedent or following a method not readily 


Ch. 6, 1-14 THe BREAD OF LIFE 143 


understood by his hearers, but was only doing what other 
leaders were also doing, can be shown by many a quota- 
tion from religious writers of the first century. A passage 
from Philo, the first century Hellenistic Jew of Alexan- 
dria, interpreting the Old Testament story of the manna, 
runs as follows:* ‘‘It is the utterance of God and the 
divine word.... This is the heavenly food which is 
indicated in the sacred records.... ‘Behold, I rain on 
you bread out of heaven’ (Exodus xvi, 4). For in very 
truth God distils from above the supernal wisdom on 
noble and contemplative minds; and they when they see 
and taste, in great joy, know what they experience, but 
do not know the Power which dispenses the gift... . 
But they shall be taught. . . that this is the bread which 
the Lord gave them to eat.”’ 

Detailed study of the verses brings out the religious 
power of the discourse. ‘‘After this’’ is one of the usual 
introductory phrases announcing a new scene or story. 
‘‘The other side’’ assumes a knowledge on the part of the 
audience that Jesus’ home was on the west side. ‘‘Sea of 
Tiberias,’’ which is found only in this Gospel, makes an 
interesting item for Ephesian ears because Tiberius was 
a Roman emperor who had a home on the little lake of 
Galilee and one of its town was named after him. 

In verse 2 the reference to ‘‘signs’’ was a hint to the 
listener that he was about to hear another incident, similar 
in significance to that of the signs ‘‘which he showed in 
what he did for the sick.’’ ‘‘The sick’’ is another of 
John’s favorite cross references in his constant desire that 
his preaching shall build up a single total impression. In 
this case the allusion is to the two cures of the preceding 
chapters. 

‘‘The passover was near.’’ This explains the presence 
of such an unusual concourse of people. Such explana- 
tions show that John, even more than Mark, knows that 
small details help to make a story more interestingly real. 

2 De profugis, section 25. See also Westcott. 


144 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Another case in point is Jesus’ question to Philip in verse 
5. Not that there is any uncertainty on Jesus’ part as 
to how it shall be done. Jesus knows (6); but it is his 
way to ask questions of those around him to set them think- 
ing. Even a lad (contrast Mark) is allowed to help. 

The two fish became as favorite a subject in early Chris- 
tian art as did the loaves. On the walls of the catacombs 
of Rome a fish is a frequent sight. Its use as a symbol in 
early Christian history was so common that it almost ap- 
proached in significance the cross itself. It recalled this 
story of the feeding of the multitude and thus echoed all 
the significance which John gathered from it. The Greek 
word for fish was unique, also, in this respect: every letter 
formed the initial of one of the chief words of the Chris- 
tian Gospel. The word ‘‘ichthus’’ thus automatically rep- 
resented to the Greek his words for Jesus, Christ, God’s 
Son, Savior. 

"Incotc 
Xototéc 
Ocob 
Yids 
Lwotyje 


To parallel the situation in English it is only necessary 
to suppose that our word fish was spelled with the five 
letters JCGSS. Jesus is the Christ, God’s Son (xx, 31), 
Savior of the world (iv, 42). 

In the succeeding verses John’s narrative follows the 
synoptic narrative rather closely except for the omission 
from verse 11 as noted above of the disciples as inter- 
mediaries in the distribution. The word ‘‘filled’’ in verse 
12 has an under meaning. Both here and in verse 26 
in Ephesus that word would suggest the rich and varied 
content of the word ‘‘fullness’’ as Paul used it in Ephesians 
(1, 23; 111, 19; iv, 13) and Colossians (i, 19; 11, 9). Paul’s 
prayer for his converts is that they ‘‘may be filled with all 
the fullness of God’’; and his conviction was that in 


Ch. 6, 16-21 THE STORM ON THE SEA 145 


Jesus ‘‘dwells all the fullness of God’s nature embodied.”’ 
The same word had wide circulation in the mystery re- 
ligions to convey the thought that human beings may be 
‘*filled’’ with divine knowledge and life and power. The 
sense of uplift which we feel in doing some one a real 
Service, or in contemplating the stars, or after a quiet 
talk with God, was coveted by the people of Ephesus, and 
in the mystery religions was technically named the sense 
of ‘‘fullness’’ or ‘‘divine fullness.’’ In verse 14 the word 
‘‘sion’’ again reminds the reader or hearer to be on the 
lookout for the significance of this incident in relation to 
Jesus’ divine mission and its under meaning as a symbol 
of Christian truth and experience. 

The whole story thus far is a literal fulfillment as it 
stands of the beatitude, ‘‘ Blessed are you that hunger now; 
for you shall be filled’’ (Luk. vi, 21). The sermon now 
to follow is keyed to the more spiritual beatitude of Mat- 
thew’s gospel (v, 6), ‘‘Blessed are they that hunger and 
thirst after righteousness for they shall be filled.’’ 


THE STORM ON THE SEA 
JOHN VI, 16-21 


vi, 16. When evening came, his disciples went down 
to the sea; 17. and, embarking in a boat, were on their 
way crossing over to Capernaum. And it had become 
quite dark. And Jesus had not yet joined them. 18. 
Now the sea was roughening because of a strong wind 
blowing. 19. After rowing three or four miles they 
see Jesus walking on the sea and approaching the boat. 
And they were frightened. 20. But he says to them, 
It is I; do not be afraid. 21. Then they were going 
to take him into the boat, and all at once the boat 
erounded on the shore to which they were going. 


Again John finds just the interlude he has use for in 
the gospel of Mark. His practice, as shown in ii, 12, chap- 
ter v, and elsewhere, is to interpose a slight interval 


146 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


between a sign and the explanation of its significance. 
Postponement of an interpretation which he has in mind 
to give from the start is a favorite custom of the author 
(Cf., 1, 26). What could be more appropriate for this 
purpose here than the story of the conquering of the 
storm which in Mark immediately follows the feeding. 
Again there is no emphasis on the miraculous element. 
The story is told as simply as in Mark and far more simply 
than in Matthew (Cf., Mat. xiv, 24-33). John had a 
strikingly genuine religious nature. He rejoiced in the 
poetry of the Psalms. There Jehovah walks upon the 
waters. He makes a pathway in the seas (cf. Is. xliii, 16). 
He lashes the waves into fury. He stills the storm at a 
word. He says to the wind, Be still, and causes the tempest 
to cease (Ps. evil, 29). It is this imagery of omnipotence 
which these verses call up in his mind. While he does not 
say in so many words ‘‘The wind ceased’’ as is stated in 
Mar. vi, 51, the suggestion is there, just as the baptism of 
Jesus is assumed without statement in John i, 29 ff. The 
power of God manifested in the great works of nature 
suggests how overwhelmingly the power of God is equal 
to giving men fullness of life. 

The purpose of the narrative of the storm is to surround 
the sermon now to follow with an atmosphere of God’s 
sustaining power, which will serve as a transition from 
the story of the feeding to a presentation of the convert- 
making material which it contained. 


FOOD FOR ETERNAL LIFE 
JOHN VI, 22-51 


vi, 22. On the next day, 24. when the people saw that 
Jesus was not there, they got into the boats and came 
to Capernaum to look for him. 25. And when they 
found him they said, Rabbi, when did you come here? 
26. Jesus answered, You are secking me not because 
you saw signs, but because you ate that bread and were 
filled. 27. Work, not for the food which perishes, but 


Ch. 6, 22-51 Foop FoR ETERNAL LIFE 147 


for the food which abides for eternal life, which the 
Son of Man will give you. 28. They said to him, What 
must we do to perform the work of God? 29. Jesus 
answered, This is the work of God, that you believe 
in him whom he has sent. 380. They said to him, What 
sign are you showing? ‘Tell us in order that we may 
see and believe? What is it you are doing? 31. Our 
forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as the Scrip- 
ture says, He gave them bread out of heaven to eat. 
o2. Jesus said to them, It was not Moses that gave 
you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you 
the true bread out of heaven. 33. The bread of God 
is that which comes down out of heaven and gives life 
to the world. 34. They said to him, Master, give us 
that bread always. 35. Jesus said to them, I am the 
bread of life: he that comes to me will not hunger, and 
he that believes on me will never thirst. 

vi, 41. The Jews began to murmur because he said, 
I am the bread which came down out of heaven. 42. 
They said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose 
father and mother we know? 43. Jesus answered, 45. It 
is written in the prophets, And all men will be taught 
by God. 46. Not that any one has ever seen the Father 
except the one who is from God. 47. Whoever believes 
already has eternal life. 48. I am the bread of life. 
49. Your forefathers ate the manna, and yet they died. 
50. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, 
of which a man may eat and never die. 51. I am the 
living bread that has come down out of heaven. Any 
one who eats this bread will live forever. 


Before proceeding to the statement of his text or theme 
John tells something of the Galilean circumstances in which 
Jesus preached. The extended study of the religions of 
the first century which has been carried on in recent years 
has made us sure of some very definite conclusions. One 
of these is that a chief reason for the triumph of Chris- 


148 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tianity lay in the fact that its founder was not shrouded 
in legend and abstraction but was presented as an historic 
man of flesh and blood who had recently lived on a defi- 
nite spot of earth. It was John and not Paul who was 
responsible for putting emphasis on the actual humanity 
of Jesus. So here, as elsewhere, John gives us a picture, 
Jesus by the Sea of Galilee surrounded by his disciples. 

In verse 26 for the third time the word ‘‘sign’’ occurs. 
‘*You are seeking me not because you saw signs, but 
because you ate the loaves and were filled.’’ It is clear 
from this statement that in this passage a work of Jesus 
rightly understood as a ‘‘sign’’ of his spiritual power con- 
stitutes a sound basis for Christian belief. Westcott para- 
phrases thus: ‘‘That one last miracle... was to you a 
gross material satisfaction, and not a pledge, a parable 
of something higher. You fail to see in it the lesson 
which it was designed to teach, that I am waiting to 
relieve the hunger of the soul.’’ 

The principal plea or theme of the discourse is stated 
in verse 27: ‘‘ Work not for the food which perishes, but 
for the food which abides for eternal life, which the Son 
of Man will give you.’’ The word ‘‘food’’ here is trans- 
lated ‘‘meat’’ in iv, 32, 34, and forms a link between the 
two chapters, the one on the water of life, the other on the 
food of life. In chapter iv Jesus said, ‘‘ Whoever drinks 
of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; 
but the water that I will give him shall become in him 
a spring of water surging up for eternal life’’; here he 
speaks on the one hand of the food which perishes, and 
on the other of the food which he ‘‘will give,’’ the ‘‘living 
bread’’ which abides for ‘‘eternal life.’’ 

When they put their daring question, How can we, too, 
learn to perform the works of God? (28) they receive the 
equally daring answer, the work of God for them to per- 
form is to believe on him whom God has sent. Belief based 
on a personal knowledge of him (see on ii, 15) affords 
entrance to partnership and union with Jesus. The rela- 


Ch. 6, 22-51 Foop FoR ETERNAL LIFE 149 


tion as portrayed in the verses to follow is so close as 
to be the meat or food by which the soul of the believer 
is sustained in vigorous life. If such be the outcome of 
‘‘belief in him,’’ christening it a ‘‘work of God’’ com- 
parable to Jesus’ feeding of the multitude is something 
more than the hyperbole it might first appear. 

‘What sign, then, are you showing?’’ (80) The expres- 
sion, ‘‘for a sign,’’ in the common version is misleading. 
The word ‘‘for’’ is not there. The expression is parallel 
to the question in ii, 18, and is perhaps equivalent to 
asking, What is the interpretation or significance of what 
you have done? They have been trying to think out a satis- 
factory interpretation themselves. Naturally, they would 
turn to their Scriptures and to a famous chapter in their 
national tradition. 

‘‘Our forefathers ate the manna’’ (31). The story is 
one of the most popular in the Bible. It was peculiarly 
serviceable with hearers familiar with Greek learning be- 
cause Philo had already interpreted it to the Hellenistic 
world as a spiritual parable. In the quotation given above, 
Philo plainly says that the manna which came down was 
the knowledge which God dispenses to his children. This 
made it easy for a spokesman of the Gospel in Ephesus 
to be understood in saying that in Christianity the gift 
of the light and leading of the Spirit by Jesus was a 
greater dispensation out of heaven than all pre-Christian 
knowledge. 

In verse 32, the likenesses in these two chapters continue, 
paralleling the contrast between water from a well an 
hundred feet deep and water from a living spring over 
which a man ean always stoop and drink his fill. Quite 
possibly, the manna is to be understood incidentally as 
representing Judaism, just as did the well in the other 
story. Verse 32, after explaining that they were wrong 
in saying that Moses gave the manna, informs them that 
it is not to be confused with the ‘‘true bread’’ which comes 
out of heaven. 


150 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


‘‘Master, give us this bread’’ (34), duplicates iv, 15, 
‘“Master, give me this water,’’ and the close relation be- 
tween these chapters is further apparent in verse 35. 
‘‘Shall not hunger’’ (35) is the carrying of the explana- 
tion to the point where the literal understanding becomes 
impossible and the spiritual meaning is forced upon the 
listener. ‘‘Shall never thirst’’ (35) is another echo from 
chapter iv, in form an exact repetition or quotation (Cf., 
iv, 14). 

John throws what he has to say into the form of dramatic 
dialogue again and again for the greater vividness to be 
gained from thus having Jesus speak in the first person. 
In this case, his use of dramatic dialogue enables him to 
ask his audience to imagine Jesus standing in the Ephesian 
church, speaking in person to them and saying, ‘‘I am the 
bread’’ (Cf., notes on v, 20-29, and on, ‘‘I am the good 
shepherd,’’ x, 7 ff.). Plainly, the gift of eternal life is 
inclusive of the meat and drink by which that eternal life 
is kept alive, not at a poor dying rate, but in vigorous 
good health. He is the bread of life (35) in the sense 
that one who ‘‘believes in him,’’ in obtaining eternal life, 
obtains the meat and drink by which that eternal life is 
kept alive and vigorous. 

In verses 41-51 it is again the Ephesian audience in the 
euise of ‘‘the Jews’’ which is objecting: How ean a literal 
man of Nazareth, a son of Joseph, be spoken of as having 
come down out of heaven? (42). On ‘‘son of Joseph’’ see 
notes on i, 45, and ii, 4. John reminds them that it is a 
familiar teaching of their own Scriptures that men’s knowl- 
edge comes from above (45). He counsels them not to 
understand him to mean that God is a visible being (46), 
but that just as their Seriptures furnish authority for 
speaking of higher knowledge as having a superhuman 
source, so it must be legitimate to speak of the higher 
life (47) as coming from above. John has told his hearers 
in Ephesus from the first that Jesus is the visitor to earth 


Ch. 6, 53-58 THE BREAD AND THE WINE 151 


from the realm of the spirit and that as the Logos-Light 
able to light the way for men who ‘‘believe in him’’ out 
of the realm of the flesh, he came from heaven bringing 
the gift of eternal life with him. 

To be sure, the manna (49) came according to the story 
out of heaven, says John, but those who ate the manna 
afterward ‘‘died’’ like other men (49), ¢@.e., without finding 
a ford or crossing over into the realm of the spirit. Other 
religions in Ephesus which purport to come from heaven 
have failed men in this very respect; Judaism in partic- 
ular. Paul testified that there was no ennobling power in 
its standard of morality sufficient to supply them with the 
ability to lay hold of eternal life. Paul says (Rom. vii, 9), 
‘“When the commandment came I died’’ (Cf., ‘‘died’’ in 
the present verse, John vi, 49). But Jesus came from 
heaven, bringing with him more than a standard of moral- 
ity, more than knowledge. In him was eternal life which 
is able under the conditions of contact described by John 
as ‘‘belief in him’’ to supply the spark of ignition that 
sets life like its own aflame in the soul of the disciple. 
He is in a real sense ‘‘the living bread’’ (51) inasmuch as 
the gift of eternal life would be a mockery except it in- 
cluded the gift of the meat and drink by which that eternal 
life can be kept alive. 


THE BREAD AND THE WINE 
JOHN VI, 53-58 


vi, 53. I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son 
of Man and drink his blood, you have not life in you. 
54. Any one who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood 
has eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 
55. My flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. 
56. Any one who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood 
abides in me, and I in him. 57. As the living Father 
sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he who 
feeds on me shall live because of me. 58. This is the 


152 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


bread which has come down out of heaven: not such 
as the forefathers ate, and yet died; he who feeds on 
this bread will live forever. 


These six verses (53-58) contain six slightly varied state- 
ments of the one affirmation. While repetition is a char- 
acteristic of popular speech, one who reads these verses 
over and over cannot escape the impression that they are 
for liturgical use. The sixfold repetition appears to mark 
them as belonging to a communion service in which they 
correspond to the rhythm of some act repeated over and 
over. Possibly they are six out of many such variations 
used by the author in administering the Eucharist, which 
he noted on paper as illustrations of many such forms 
which might be used. Again, the six may have a com- 
pleteness in themselves and have been used along with 
six several acts which. John performed at communion. 
Perhaps there were six elders or deacons who assisted, or 
twelve to whom the author handed the elements by twos. 

Their most striking characteristic is the extreme to which 
the physical or material symbol used is carried. John 
felt that in the distribution of the elements an extreme 
effort should be made to show the participant how thor- 
ough and complete must be his own assimilation of the 
eternal life embodied in Jesus. The thought of the Church 
never became confused enough over ‘‘born again’’ to sit 
down with Nicodemus and try to puzzle out an intelligible 
process by which a man could enter his mother’s womb a 
second time. Nor did the thought of the Church become 
confused enough over ‘‘living water’’ to begin to wonder 
with the woman at the well over the location of the spot 
of earth whence Jesus was able to obtain it. Why the 
thought of the Church should have become confused enough 
over ‘‘eat his flesh and drink his blood’’ to sit down with 
‘‘the Jews’’ and try to puzzle out an intelligible process 
by which ‘‘this man can give us his flesh to eat’’ is a mys- 
tery beyond solution. 


Ch. 6, 53-58 THE BREAD AND THE WINE 153 


Birth is the only door we know by which to get into 
life. The gift of eternal life made the best that the Greek 
could do with life with his philosophy, or the Jew with 
his Judaism, seem a living death to the Christian believers 
on Jesus in Ephesus. And as they had once lived this 
living death themselves they were the only ones whose 
word on this subject was worth attention. What could 
they say to inquirers but that the door through which they 
had to pass in order to get from their former living death 
to this eternal life was ‘‘a second birth’’? When asked, 
what do men live on in this new eternal life, how could 
they reply other than to say that they had another kind 
of meat and bread to eat altogether and another kind of 
water altogether to drink? 

The hour of the communion service is high noon for 
the Christian. It is natural for him, then, to dream dreams 
of what shall be when the work of the Spirit in him has 
reached the zenith of its perfect consummation. What 
higher flight can a Christian believer’s prophetic soul 
take than to dream the dream that in the end he shall 
have a constitution in all points lke that of Jesus? 

When inquirers go on to ask them, then, what consti- 
tution is given to men with which to live this eternal life, 
how can they reply other than to talk in terms of flesh 
and blood, the time-honored form of words used to describe 
the constitution that makes us residents of the realm of 
the material? Finally, when pressed by these same in- 
quirers to define for them the goal of eternal life at its 
maturity, what sublimer answer has any Christian preacher 
ever given than to say, we must feed on Jesus until our 
assimilation of the eternal life embodied in him is so thor- 
oughly complete that we shall have a constitution in all 
points like his own. 

‘*Tt is the spirit that gives life; the flesh profits nothing: 
the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are 
life’’ (63). 


CHAPTER XI 


THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 
JOHN VII TO Ix 


[vili, 3. And the Pharisees bring a woman who had 
been caught in the act of committing adultery. 4. They 
say to Jesus, Teacher, this woman was found in the very 
act of adultery. 5. In the law Moses commanded us to 
stone such women; what do you say? 6. They said this 
to test him, in order that they might have grounds for 
bringing an accusation against him. Jesus stooped down 
and with his finger wrote on the ground. 7. When 
they continued asking him he rose and said: Let the 
one among you who has never sinned throw the first 
stone at her. 8. And again he stooped down, and wrote 
on the ground (the sins of each one). 9. And when 
they heard (read) they began to go out one by one, 
starting with the oldest: and Jesus was left alone, and 
the woman. 10. Jesus rose and said to her, Woman, 
where are they? Did no one condemn you? 11. She 
said, No one, sir. Jesus said, Neither do I condemn you: 
go on your way; and do not sin again.] 


The story of the woman taken in adultery (vii, 53- 
viii, 11) is not found in the earliest copies of the New 
Testament. It is quite certain that it did not belong orig- 
inally to the Gospel of John. On the other hand, it reads 
like a true incident out of the ministry of Jesus. There is 
no trace in it of the unnatural tone of later apocryphal 
gospels. It probably is a passage from the ‘‘Gospel Ac- 
cording to the Hebrews,’’ one of the comparatively early 

154 


Ch. 8, 3-11 THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 155 


extra-canonical gospels. The way it came to occupy its 
present position in the Gospel of John is probably this: 
Copied on a separate sheet, that sheet or page was tucked 
loose into a volume of the New Testament Gospels. Later 
a scribe in making a transcript of the volume copied this 
sheet into the text at that point, noting in the margin 
that this section was a separate fragment. Later copyists 
began to omit the marginal note which has now been lost 
entirely. There are a number of late manuscripts which 
contain the section embodied in the text, but the only im- 
portant early manuscript containing it is Codex Bezae. 
Some later ones contain the interesting reading included 
in parenthesis in verses 8, 9. Other examples of matter 
drawn from independent sheets into the text of the New 
Testament are: Mar. xvi, 9-20; II Cor. vi, 14-vii, 1; 
also the last chapter, perhaps, of Romans. 

This passage is of interest to us here chiefly as a means 
of showing the contrast between a piece of ordinary nar- 
rative of which this story is a good example and the quite 
different style in which this Gospel itself is written. Here 
we have no symbolism, no exposition of a sign. The woman 
is a woman and we are asked to take no other view of her. 
No object or word in the story can be understood in a double 
sense. There is no suggestion of anything similar to bread 
intended for spiritual consumption, to a wine of the spirit, 
to worship of the spirit, to living water. It is a plain 
story of the compassionate heart of Jesus. The teaching 
is the incident itself. The feeding of the multitude may 
be a symbol of spiritual feeding, but this story conveys 
only its own literal lesson in Christian forgiveness. 

Students of the little narrative have always asked what 
it was that Jesus wrote on the ground. Perhaps he was 
only making aimless strokes during the time he took to 
consider the situation. More probably he was writing 
actual words. He may well have written the same words 
that he afterward spoke out loud to them. This seems 
more likely than the conjecture of the manuscript scribe 


156 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


who answered the question on the basis of verse 7 by ex- 
plaining that Jesus wrote down the sins of each one 
present. 


A MAN OF GALILEE 
JOHN vil, 1-41 


vii, 1. After this Jesus spent his time going about 
in Galilee. 38. His brothers said to him, Leave this 
place and go into Judea. 4. For no one does anything 
privately if he is seeking to be known publicly. Show 
yourself to the world. 6. Jesus says to them, My time 
has not yet come. 9. And he remained in Galilee. 

10. When his brothers had gone to the Festival Jesus 
also went, not publicly but privately. 12. And there 
was much discussion about him. Some said, He is a 
good man; others said, No. 14. About the middle of 
the festival week Jesus went into the Temple and began 
to teach. This astonished the Jews. They said, How 
has this man got his learning when he has never studied ? 
Jesus replied, My teaching is not my own, but comes 
from him who sent me. 17. If any man wishes to do 
God’s will, he will know whether my teaching is from 
God or whether I speak on my own authority. 18. He 
who speaks simply for himself seeks honor for himself. 

19. Did not Moses give you the Law? Yet not one 
of you obeys the Law. 23. If a man receives circum- 
cision on the Sabbath, to avoid breaking the law of 
Moses, are you angry at me for making a man healthy 
on the Sabbath? 

30. His hour had not yet come. 31. Many believed in 
him and said, When the Christ comes, will he show 
more signs than this man has shown? 38. Jesus said, 
A little while longer I am to be with you, and then I 
am going to him who sent me. 35. The Jews said, Where 
is this man going? Will he go to the Dispersion among 
the Greeks, and teach the Greeks? 36. What does he 
mean when he says, Where I go you cannot come? 


Ch. 7, 1-41 A MAN or GALILEE 157 


37. On the last day of the Festival Jesus stood up 
and declared, If any one is thirsty let him come to me 
and drink. 38. If any one believes in me, out of his 
heart shall flow rivers of living water. 39. By this he 
meant the Spirit which those who believed in him were 
to receive; for the Spirit had not yet come. 40. Some 
said, This is certainly the Prophet. 41. Others said, 
This is the Christ! But some said, What! Does the 
Christ come out of Galilee? 


With the omission of vii, 53—viili, 11, chapters vii—ix 
contain for the most part notes of a talk or of a series of 
talks on a question probably often asked by inquirers in 
Ephesus: Can a man of remote Galilee and of little edu- 
eation be the Savior of humanity, and the light of the 
world? The relation between ideas of education and the 
figurative idea of light as knowledge at that time was 
very close. Perhaps chapter vii constitutes a separate talk 
from a second one in chapter viii; if so, the ideas in both 
are related. Chapter vii deals with two objections: (1) 
That Jesus was not known as a man of education (15), and 
(2) naturally no one in Ephesus would expect the Savior 
of the world to ‘‘come out of Galilee’’ (41). The defensive 
replies of chapter vii lead to the aggressive assertion of 
chapter vili that students of learning must go to Jesus, 
not he to them, for he is the one who dispenses the true 
education and the true knowledge which elevates and 
ennobles the life of man. Jesus is ‘‘the light of the world’’ 
(viii, 12). 

The scene of the events of chapter vii is in Galilee, but 
the Ephesian situation was uppermost in John’s mind. 
His thought moves in two sections, the one on the ground 
level of Palestine, the other in the upper air of a world- 
conception of Jesus’ ministry. 

Previously (in vii, 4) the disciples in Galilee were urg- 
ing, ‘‘No man does anything in secret, if he is seeking 
to be known publicly. Show yourself to the world.’’ As 


158 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


is its custom, this Gospel seeks the sanction of Jesus for 
its reply to the request of inquirers in Ephesus for an 
explanation why he did his work in a remote corner of the 
world. That answer is ‘‘my time has not yet come’’ 
(vii, 6). For this Gospel that answer means ‘‘my time 
has not yet come’’ to begin my work in the world’s big 
cities like Ephesus, Corinth and Rome. And after saying 
this ‘‘he remained in Galilee’’ (vii, 9). That this is the 
true significance of Jesus’ answer for this Gospel is con- 
firmed later after the introduction of the other question 
which concerned Jesus’ education. In verse 30 that answer 
is repeated in this same sense: ‘‘His hour had not yet 
eome,’’ and to this is added the further information that 
yet a little while and I go to him that sent me and thither 
ye cannot come. Further light is thrown on the point of 
view which this Gospel here seeks to make clear by the 
question now interjected by ‘‘the Jews’’: ‘‘Will he go 
to the Dispersion among the Greeks, and teach the Greeks ?”’ 
This is exactly, we know, what Jesus did do, spiritually 
speaking, and what John knew he was doing right then 
in Ephesus. Continued confirmation of this view meets 
us in verse 39 in the words, ‘‘The Spirit had not yet 
come.’’ The work of the Spirit is his real work and repre- 
sents the form his work is to take in the big world outside 
Palestine. What he did in Galilee he did only as a prepa- 
ration. His hour for this work outside Palestine had not 
yet come then. This is John’s answer to the oft-repeated 
question, ‘‘ Does the Christ come out of Galilee?’’ (41). 
The other Ephesian objection that Jesus was only an 
ordinary man is partially stated in verse 12: ‘‘Some said, 
He is a good man; others said, No.’’ It is more fully 
stated in 15, ‘‘How does this man have such learning, 
when he has never studied?’’ In reality, the talk on the 
Light of the World which is to follow (chh. viii, ix) is 
the fuller answer to this question, but John first makes 
some pointed observations. He says that the world has 
had enough of emperors and leaders who speak ex cathedra, 


Ch. 8, 12-58 THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 159 


They seek their own glory (18). What the world needs 
is not one who has a teaching or commandment of his 
own, but one who utters the truth at the heart of the 
universe, which he has been commissioned to tell (16, 18). 

John’s second preliminary answer calls pointed attention 
to the failure of Judaism in the face of the practical 
success of the Christian Gospel. ‘‘Did not Moses give you 
the Law? Yet not one of you obeys the Law?’’ ‘‘When 
the Christ comes will he show more signs than this man 
has shown?’’ (31). Jesus’ work in Galilee and Jerusalem 
was sufficient to accredit him, small as it was compared 
with the works to be performed when he would ‘‘go to the 
Dispersion among the Greeks, and teach the Greeks’’ (85). 
*‘If any one is thirsty let him come and drink. There- 
after from within him shall flow rivers of living water’’ 
(37, 38). ‘‘By this he meant the Spirit which those who 
believe in him were to receive: for the Spirit had not then 
yet come.’’ ‘‘This is certainly the Prophet. This is the 
Christ’’ (40, 41). The words are an appeal to the un- 
converted among his listeners on the basis of the work of 
the Spirit in the hearts and lives of Christian believers in 
Ephesus to accept Jesus as the bringer of eternal life to 
them, also. 


THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 
JOHN vil, 12-58 


viii, 12. I am the light of the world: he who follows 
me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light 
of life. 18. The Father who sent me bears testimony 
to me. 19. They said to him, Where is your Father? 
Jesus answered, If you knew me you would know my 
Father also. 21. I am going away and you will seek 
me; but you cannot come where I am going. 28. When 
you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will © 
know that I am what I say, and that I do nothing of 
myself, but speak as the Father has taught me. 29. For 
I always do what pleases him. 


160 Tur GosPeL or JOHN 


31. If you abide by my word, 32. you will know the 
truth and the truth will set you free. 33. They an- 
swered, We have never been in slavery. 34. Jesus re- 
plied, Every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. 
35. A slave does not abide in the home permanently, 
but a son abides always. 36. If the Son sets you free 
you will be free indeed. 39. They answered, Our father 
is Abraham. Jesus says to them, If you are Abraham’s 
children, do what Abraham did. 40. You are seeking 
to kill me, a man who has told you the truth he has 
heard from God: Abraham did not do that. 41. You 
are doing what your real father does. They said to him, 
We are not illicit children. 42. Jesus said, 44. You are 
children of your father, the devil. He was a murderer 
from the first, and does not stand by the truth because 
there is no truth in him. 46. Who of you can convict 
me of sin? If I am telling you the truth, why do you 
refuse to believe me? 51. If any one keeps my word he 
shall never see death. 52. The Jews said to him, Now 
we know that you are possessed by a demon. You say, 
If any one keeps your word he will never taste death. 
53. Are you greater than our father Abraham, who 
died? And the prophets are dead. 54. Jesus answered, 
If I show honor to myself, such honor is nothing: it is 
my Father who does me honor. 56. Your father Abra- 
ham rejoiced that he would see my day. 58. In truth 
I tell you, Before Abraham was born, I am. 


‘‘The Light of the World.’’ Next to the word ‘‘life’’ 
this word ‘‘light’’ is the most expressive and most power- 
ful in John’s vocabulary. Chapter viii develops its sig- 
. nificance and leads up to an example in the giving of sight 
to the blind man (chap. ix). This is in full accord with 
John’s custom of seeking among the stories of the ministry 
of Jesus the particular one which links up best with the 
major theme which he is developing. This is preéminently 
true in the case of his two greatest themes, ‘‘light’’ and 


Ch. 8, 12-58 THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 161 


“‘life.’’ The story of Lazarus in chapter xi is made to 
embody the supreme truth that Jesus is ‘‘the life’’ (xi, 25) 
and that he who believes in him ‘‘will never die’’ (xi, 26). 
Here the story of the giving of sight to the blind is so 
presented that no listener can fail to see how it adds depth 
to the significance of the phrase, ‘‘Light of the World.’’ 

In a way, the word ‘‘light’’ lends itself even more 
effectively to the uses of this Gospel than the word “‘life.’’ 
Its figurative use is instinctive with all men everywhere, 
and is prominent in nearly all religions. Its secondary 
meaning is easy to grasp, yet limitless in suggestion. Night 
brought darkness in the ancient world. Work practically 
ceased at sunset. The only artificial light was furnished 
by a piece of wick in a spoonful of oil. Matches were, of 
course, unknown. There was no way in which the average 
person could start a fire for warmth or cooking or illumi- 
nation except by borrowing a light from some other hearth. 
Many are the ancient legends proclaiming the precious- 
ness of light. The most familiar story of all runs to the 
effect that the first bit of light or fire had been brought 
down out of heaven and given to men, which thus put 
man’s existence in this particular on a level with that 
of the gods. This legend has points of close relationship 
with the idea that the light of knowledge equips a man to 
live the life of a god (see below). 

In that day nearly every village had its shrine; and a 
chief duty of the shrine-keepers was to tend and keep 
the lamp or lamps burning in order that the people might 
never in any emergency have to do without this gift of 
the gods. In the Temple of Diana at Ephesus the temple 
virgins who guarded the sacred light were surrounded with 
great elaborateness of dress and ritual. Light, then, had 
its fourfold suggestion for every one. In the first place, 
it was a fundamental essential of daily existence, to be 
guarded and tended. In the second place, it symbolized 
the presence of deity in the temple, in line with the thought 
that its origin was heavenly and that it is akin to the 


162 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


stars. Thirdly, to the more educated it was a symbol for 
the light of Reason, which is an essential to the mind and 
soul. Fourthly, light came to be regarded as the source 
or cause of life (Cf., Light of Life, viii, 12; cf., also xi, 
9, 10, 25) from the fact of common observation that no 
plant grows in the dark, showing that light is essential 
to its vitality. 

The so-called Gnostics in the time of John were 
making large use of the word ‘‘light’’ and its opposite 
‘‘darkness’’ in the doctrines peculiar to them. They put 
special emphasis upon the third and fourth shades of 
meaning just mentioned. The relation that the Gnosties 
sustain to John has already been suggested in this volume.* 
They affirmed in many ways that knowledge is the ‘‘light’’ 
of men, that its source is heavenly, that it dispels the 
darkness of ordinary existence, and finally that it imparts 
a new life which because of the heavenly origin of light 
partakes of the nature of Divine Life. By the help of 
the light of reason a man may, in the midst of earthly 
handicaps, live a life that is heavenly in its nature. 

John’s use of light does not merely pursue the line of 
development of the Gnostic idea. His aim is less specula- 
tive, more practical. His use of the word is based rather 
upon all four shades of meaning mentioned above. Al- 
though he uses the same vocabulary in many eases as the 
Gnosties, it is not safe to assume that he was a complete 
master of Gnostic speculation. His own usage runs parallel 
with the Gnostic, and neither coincides nor is based upon 
it. John moves instead upon a very practical level. 

Justin Martyr, a second-century philosopher, when asked 
why he became a Christian replied it was because Chris- 
tianity enabled the common man to live like a philosopher. 
His meaning seems to be that a knowledge of Jesus gave 
to men with no schooling a self-control and dignity of life 
which a philosopher is still seeking at the end of an 
extended education. This explains John’s emphasis upon 

1Chap. II, section on Light. 


Ch. 8, 12-58 THE LIGHT oF THE WoRLD 163 


‘‘Inowing’’ Jesus and upon the emancipating effect of 
such knowledge. 

The Easter fire at Jerusalem is one of the most im- 
pressive Christian ceremonies of today. After midnight on 
Easter morning a torch, symbolically lighted from on high, 
is passed out of the empty sepulchre and gives of its light 
to scores of waiting, dead torches which are brought to 
life by its light. The light is carried to waiting lamps 
near and distant. From the Mount of Olives one on watch 
may see, hour after hour, more and more distant hilltops 
respond with flashes of light. This spread of light from 
the empty sepulchre continues until the day dawns. Such 
is the picture in John’s mind as often as he speaks of 
Jesus as the Light of the World. The light of the knowl- 
edge of God in Jesus was spreading farther and farther 
into the darkness of the world in anticipation of the coming 
of the new day. 

Although ideas and usages current in Ephesus entered 
into it, John found this figure of his, functioning in early 
Christian tradition and in the words of Jesus himself. 
Compare Mat. iv, 16: ‘‘The people that sat in darkness 
saw a great light;’’ and again: ‘‘You are the light of the 
world’’ (Mat. v, 14). 

The conception of Jesus as the light is in John viii first 
safeguarded against identification with any view that the 
light which he gives is a product of his own personal 
philosophy. Secondly, its points of difference as well as 
likeness are, also, brought out when the comparison is 
made with the thought fundamental in Gnosticism that 
the light of knowledge ‘‘emancipates’’ men from the ‘‘slav- 
ery’’ of ordinary existence. 

The Christian faith in Jesus is based upon no claim of 
his own in regard to-himself. God is spirit and so are we. 
When Spirit speaks to spirit we hear God’s testimony to 
Jesus: ‘‘The Father who sent me bears testimony to me’’ 
18). Jesus tells his unbelieving opponents that he is 
going back above whence he came and that they will not 


164 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


be able to follow because ‘‘belief in him’’ and what he 
represents is the only door to that realm for them. ‘*‘ Where 
I go, you cannot come.’’ The over meaning of the cruci- 
fixion of Jesus (28) appears very frequently in the Gospel. 
When the Jews ‘‘lifted up’”’ the Son of Man they exalted 
him to a position high enough for all the world to see 
and recognize him (Cf., iii, 14). 

But the chief hallmark of Jesus as the Light, in the 
understanding of this chapter, is associated with his eman- 
cipatory power (381 ff.). This thought runs parallel to 
but distinct from the Gnostic thought of the emancipating 
power of the light of reason. According to the Gnostic 
view ‘‘the soul of man is a spark of heavenly fire belonging 
to the divine sphere, but has become so entangled in matter 
that release is impossible without divine aid. This aid 
is mediated in the form of revealed knowledge... . 
Through this divine enlightenment the soul now attains 
liberation.’’? In verse 32, the straight highway to the 
whole truth on this subject is pointed out, 2.e., standing 
by Jesus’ word. The familiar misunderstanding in verse 33 
of ‘‘the Jews’’ leads to a fuller statement in 34, 35 of the 
Christian conception of freedom. It turns out to be in 
close agreement with that of Paul. Paul says, for example, 
in Gal. iv, 7: ‘‘You are no longer a slave, but a son; 
and if a son, then an heir.’’ John, like Paul, develops the 
figure of a ‘‘slave’’ as contrasted with a ‘‘son’’ (35) into 
a picture of the emancipation of a slave (36); compare 
Paul’s repeated ‘‘You were bought with a price’’ (I Cor. 
vi, 20; vii, 23) ; compare also Mar. x, 45, with its figure 
of a ‘‘ransom’’ or price paid for liberation. 

The picture of a slave attaining his freedom was a com- 
mon and impressive one in the Roman world. Epictetus 
is only one example in thousands. Former American con- 
ditions in which every slave was black and every owner 
white give a false impression of conditions in the older 
day. Often slaves then were educated; sometimes they 

Case, p. 827. 


Ch. 8, 12-58 THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD 165 


were noble-born men or women who had been captured 
in war or sold for debt. The ceremony of emancipation 
in some temple would be perhaps a daily occurrence for 
some fortunate slave in such a large city as Ephesus. 
There would be about it the same air of festivity for the 
slave and his friends as characterizes a simple wedding 
today. The attendant circumstances and ceremonies and 
the joy of all concerned are well presented by Deissmann 
in his ‘‘Light from the Ancient East’’ (Chap. IV, 8). 

These same verses bring out plainly the world of differ- 
ence between the Gnostic and the Christian conceptions 
of freedom. For the Gnostic salvation is enlightenment, 
illumination the process, and the slavery from which man 
is thus redeemed is the slavery of ignorance. The new 
freedom is the exchange of the darkness of ignorance for 
the light of knowledge. For the Christian, salvation is 
obedience, rejuvenation the process, the complete rejuvena- 
tion of our whole human nature, and the slavery from 
which man is thus redeemed is the slavery of sin. The 
new freedom is the exchange of the old paralysis of the 
will for the executive competency which ‘‘can do all things 
through Christ that strengthens me.’’ 

No doubt many times this Christian preacher of Ephesus 
when he addressed himself directly to men holding the 
Gnostic view of freedom cited old-line Judaism to them 
as an outstanding example on a scale centuries long of the 
powerlessness of illumination to redeem men from the slav- 
ery of ordinary existence. In the debate that is here being 
carried on with ‘‘the Jews,’’ this ceremony of manumission 
is used by John to picture the genuinely emancipating 
effects of the spirit received in Christian baptism (87-59). 
The intensity of feeling manifested in such extreme lan- 
guage as that of vs. 41 and vs. 44, may be excused in the 
heat of the convert-making work of popular preaching to 
such inflexibly determined hearers as Jews still loyal to 
old-line Judaism. It is to be so construed if we accept 
the historical fact that literary convention in that day 


166 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


made it common usage for John as a messenger to show 
men his burning conviction that he had Jesus’ authority 
for the Christian message that he was giving them by 
turning it from the third person into the first. The alter- 
native is not a prepossessing one if we insist that John 
had no part or lot in wording or content of this sermon 
talk. Why take from him, however, the privilege granted 
freely by us to the preaching of our own day, sharply 
distinguishing the wording of the message of the messen- 
ger as his own, but holding him to make its substance 
conform ‘‘to the best of his knowledge and belief’’ with 
the teaching of him that sent him. So, with the aim of 
bringing them to their senses, this Christian preacher of 
Ephesus said to these adherents of old-line Judaism, Your 
parentage may not be illegitimate and you may be de- 
scendants of Abraham according to the flesh, but by your 
words and works of darkness when brought face to face 
with the light of salvation in Jesus you show yourselves 
spiritually to be offspring of the father of lies. Again, 
he tells them that in exchange for their sitting with folded 
hands, marking time, waiting for a catastrophic interven- 
tion of God in death and judgment, Jesus offers to men a life 
that is life, indeed, for it will take them out of the juris- 
diction of death and judgment forever (50-52). His final 
testimony to Jesus in this chapter is the argument that 
we do not have to take the word of Jesus for it that he 
brings with him the gift of eternal life, for it is confirmed 
of his Father by the gift of that life to as many as believe 
on him (54). How, then, can he be your God? How can 
you say that you know him if you have not this gift of 
eternal life as the proof that you are known of him? 
And if Jesus has the proof in this power to confer the 
gift of eternal life that he is known of the Father, how 
can he say that he knows him not? It would be a lie (55). 
Just as to Paul, the Mosaic law was only a parenthesis 
in Jewish history, so for John, Jesus is the embodiment 
of that Spirit whose activities antedate Abraham (58) 


Ch. 9, 1-7 THE HEALING OF THE BLIND MANn 167 


and is still engaged in its divine work in Ephesus. The 
light of the world which was incarnate in Jesus has been 
active in the human race from the beginning (Cf.,i,1). Itis 
noteworthy that even such a very conservative writer as 
Garvie (p. 18) calls attention to the fact that the statement 
is not made here that Jesus ‘‘was’’ before Abraham but 
that he ‘‘is.’’ The phrase marks a ‘‘timeless existence.’’ * 


THE HEALING OF THE BLIND MAN 
JOHN Ix, 1-7 


ix, 1. And as he passed by, he saw a man who had 
been blind from his birth. 2. And his disciples asked 
him, Rabbi, who sinned, this man, or his parents, that 
he was born blind? 38. Jesus answered, Neither the man 
nor his parents; but the works of God are to be made 
manifest in what happens to the man. 5. I am the light 
of the world. 6. When he had said this, he spat on the 
ground, and made a clay-salve with the saliva, and 
anointed his eyes with it, 7. and said, Go, wash in the 
Pool of Siloam (a word which means Apostle). So he 
went, and washed, and went home able to see. 


No pause occurs between chapters viii and ix. The 
thought of Jesus as the Light of the World emancipating 
men from their bondage in the darkness of ignorance is 
now given concretely symbolized expression in the story 
of the man born blind. All good public speakers cultivate 
the art of telling unforgettable stories which are the em- 
bodiment or incarnation of a life-giving truth. John 
makes doubly sure that the reader will understand that this 
story is introduced as the epitome of his theme, by stating 
the theme exactly in the middle of the story. Jesus is 
the ‘‘Light of the World’’ (5). His procedure here par- 
allels that used in the preceding talk on the Bread of Life. 
There, after the story of the feeding of the multitude, the 
announcement follows that Jesus is the bread: ‘‘I am the 

® Westcott. 


168 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


bread of life’’ (vi, 35). So here: ‘‘I am the light of the 
world.’’ 

At no point in this story of giving sight to the blind man 
are we permitted to forget that it is a vehicle of a spiritual 
truth. The older commentators used to say that John 
undertook to narrate greater miracles than any found 
in the éarlier gospels. It is often argued that this is the 
reason John chooses to tell not the cure of an ordinary 
blind man but of one who was blind from his birth. But 
it would be more to the point to say that the controlling 
reason why John chose this story was its close analogy 
to the religious fact, as John held it, that all men are 
born spiritually blind and remain so until touched by the 
power of life incarnate in Jesus. If John’s main purpose 
had been to accent the supernatural in his picture of 
the marvel, he would hardly have narrated the making of 
the clay, the anointing of the eyes, the washing in the 
pool. 

In connection with verse 2, ‘‘Who sinned, this man, or 
his parents?’’ the question is often asked whether John 
shared in the common ancient idea that every bodily afflic- 
tion was to be understood as a punishment for sin. We 
pause to note that never in any passage of his Gospel does 
John speak of demon possession as related to physical ail- 
ments as the earlier evangelists do. This makes it clear 
that he did not share in that view. He does speak twice 
of demons, but in neither case is any physical effect men- 
tioned or implied (viii, 48, 52; x, 20). 

‘‘Neither did this man sin nor his parents’? (3). The 
natural inference agrees with the one just indicated that 
John did not accept the common doctrine of a close con- 
nection between sickness and sin. ‘To be sure, the claim 
might be made that John means to state this case was an 
exception to the general rule of sin entailing sickness, 
and to say that this exceptional man was born blind in 
order that he might await Jesus’ miracle, that ‘‘the works 
of God’’ should ‘‘be made manifest’’ in him. Rather, the 


Ch. 9, 15-40 THE BLINDNESS OF THE PHARISEES 169 


answer of this Gospel might be paraphrased—‘‘ Never mind 
just now about the origin of his blindness. Fix your minds 
on the works of God that are to be made manifest in what 
is about to happen to this man.”’ 

Paul, also, uses the word ‘‘light’’ in his references to 
his conversion and at the same time relates it to the word 
‘‘knowledge.’’ God, he says, shined in his heart, ‘‘to 
give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the 
face of Jesus Christ’’ (II Cor. iv, 6). In fact, “‘light’’ 
is the most frequent word in all New Testament descrip- 
tions of Paul’s conversion. The blindness and darkness 
of Paul narrated in the Acts’ account (Acts ix, 8) form the 
direct antithesis of light and sight. The emphasis upon 
the light occurs not only in all three accounts in Acts, 
but in practically every reference in the Epistles, especially 
if we recognize the way that light and sight are presup- 
posed in the word ‘‘reveal’’ (Gal. i, 16). 


THE BLINDNESS OF THE PHARISEES 
JOHN Ix, 15-40 


ix, 15. The Pharisees asked him how he had gained 
his sight. And he said, He put some clay on my eyes, 
and I washed, and I can see. 16. Some said, This man 
does not come from God, because he does not keep the 
Sabbath. Others said, How can a man who is a sinner 
show such signs as this? 17. They say to the blind man 
again, What do you say about his opening your eyes? 
And he said, He is a prophet. 18. The Jews, however, 
did not believe until they called the parents, 19. and 
asked them, Is this your son, who you say was born 
blind? 22. The Jews had agreed that if any one ac- 
knowledged Jesus as the Christ he should be put out of 
the Synagogue. 23. So the parents said, He is of age; 
ask him. 25. He, therefore, answered, One thing I know, 
that I was blind and now I can see. 28. And they 
sneered at him and said, You are his disciple; but we 
are disciples of Moses. 29. We know that God spoke 


170 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


to Moses: but as for this man, we do not know where 
he comes from. 30. The man answered, That is the 
strange thing that you do not know where he comes 
from, and yet he gave me my sight. 32. It has never 
been heard of that any one has given sight to a man 
born blind. 33. If this man were not from God he could 
not do anything. 34. They answered, You were born 
in sin, and are you trying to teach us? And they put 
him out. 

35. Jesus heard that they had put him out; and when 
he found him he said, Do you believe in the Son of Man? 
38. And he said, Master, I believe. 39. And Jesus said, 
It is for testing men and for judgment of them that 
I have come into the world, that those who cannot see 
may see; and that those who can see should become 
blind. 40. Those of the Pharisees who were with him 
heard this and said, Then are we also blind? 


The three essential facts stand out in verse 15. They 
are, the anointing of the eyes (Cf., Rev. iii, 18) ; second, the 
washing or baptism; and third, the fullness of vision. It 
contains two points that this Christian preacher in Ephe- 
sus never tires of elaborating: (1) I showed my faith in 
him by doing what he asked and (2) received in exchange 
for my lifelong stone-blindness, full and open vision. His 
use again of the word ‘‘sign’’ (16) is a signal to his hearers 
to be on the lookout for a significance to this episode ex- 
tending far beyond the time and place of its occurrence. 
That larger meaning is nothing less than the answer to 
the question which many of his Ephesian hearers were 
asking: How can a man of distant Galilee crucified as 
a malefactor, regarded as a ‘‘sinner,’’ be the Savior of 
all men? (16) The eternal answer is the answer of this 
man born blind. ‘‘The Jews’’ in verses 18 ff. are typical 
again of the multitude whom no man can number ever 
since, who question the power of the Spirit to confer the 
gift of eternal life upon the most obscure people. Right 


Ch. 9, 15-40 Tur BLINDNESS OF THE PHARISEES aia | 


in Ephesus was a synagogue, trying to discredit every 
claim made by the Christian church (18-21). 

The reference to the rulers of the synagogue in verse 
22 shows that the author’s mind is intent upon the Ephe- 
sian situation. There were synagogues, to be sure, in Jeru- 
salem (Cf., Acts vi, 9). Yet John would hardly have sub- 
stituted ‘‘synagogue’’ in this narrative, for ‘‘Temple,’’ 
except his mind had been fixed upon experiences like those 
narrated so often of the power of the Gospel in;the Book 
of Acts. Paul had made such progress among the ‘‘fearers 
of God’’ in the synagogues of the Dispersion that in self- 
defense the Jews in many cases put out of the synagogue 
any one who accepted the new teaching. Similar ostracism 
was undoubtedly the fate in Ephesus at the time of John’s 
ministry of Jewish inquirers who dropped into the way 
of attending the Christian church. 

The most striking aspect of this whole discussion is the 
contrast which it presents between a well-organized system 
of religion with all the prestige of age, and a new and 
struggling movement, handicapped by the presumptions 
raised against it by its very newness. As often as the 
report was circulated that a certain Ephesian had found 
new light and life in some little mission station of the 
Christian Church, the Jews would try to discredit its truth. 
How could it be true when, as everybody knew, the Chris- 
tian Church had no standing. We know, said they, that 
Moses was God’s spokesman because his word has stood 
the assaults of a thousand years and, like Mount Sinai, still 
stands unimpaired. But as for this man of yesterday, we 
do not know where he came from nor whom he speaks for. 

We have had occasion to note before that this Christian 
preacher of Ephesus had an intensely practical bent of 
mind. Men tried and failed to lure him into an academic 
discussion of the nature and the agency at work, indeed, 
the whole process involved in the accomplishment of mir- 
acles. His word to those who asked to be shown how they, 
too, could work a miracle was the very pointed informa- 


172 THet GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tion that the miracle for them to perform was full and 
complete surrender to Jesus. Other men tried and failed 
to induce him to sit down with folded hands and mark time 
with them discussing just what would take place on Judg- 
ment Day. His pointed word to them was that the gift 
of eternal life open to them through the power of the spirit 
conferred in Christian baptism would take them out of 
the jurisdiction of the Judgment Day and thus render 
them immune to all its horrors. 

So this invitation to join in an academic discussion of 
theories of inspiration and a long drawn out inquiry to 
determine whether Moses or Jesus satisfies these criteria 
the better, leaves him cold. His answer to sincere inquirers, 
honestly seeking to make up their minds whether Moses 
or Jesus is the better spokesman of God, is to call in certain 
of their own Ephesian fellow-citizens and have them tell 
this blind man’s story as their own: ‘‘I showed my faith 
in him by doing what he asked and received in exchange 
for my lifelong stone-blindness, full and open vision.”’ 

Verse 30 uses the same irony in its reference to learned 
teachers of theology which we have met in vii, 15, and 
especially ‘in ili, 8, 10. In chapter iii, it was Nicodemus 
who did not ‘‘understand’’ the Spirit, ‘‘where it comes 
from or whither it goes,’’ although he was a ‘‘teacher,’’ 
and here the ‘‘strange thing”’ is that ‘‘ you learned teachers 
of religion do not know where he comes from and yet he 
gave me my sight.’’ Moreover, John takes the aggressive, 
prepared to champion before the whole world the doctrine 
that to open spiritually the eyes of a man is certainly a 
greater wonder than physically to restore sight. It is 
giving sight to eyes which were never able to see, but were 
‘‘born blind’’ (32). The only reply which old-line Juda- 
ism could make to this shifting of the whole ground of 
debate was to fall back upon its old and never-failing 
defense that all Gentiles are sinners and that all Christians 
because they do not keep the law which ‘‘God has spoken’’ 
(29) are likewise sinners (34). 


Ch. 9, 15-40 Tuer BLINDNESS OF THE PHARISEES 173 


Finally, this talk closes with a paragraph (35-41) which 
makes it plain that the whole story is told for its spiritual 
significance. These verses parallel the close of the pre- 
ceding talk on the feeding of the multitude, ‘‘The words 
that I have spoken are spirit and are life’’ (vi, 63). Here 
the man who received his sight and Jesus meet again and 
he ‘‘believes’’ (38) in the ‘‘Son of Man.’’ Then follow 
the words defining again (Cf., iii, 19) the Christian idea 
of ‘‘judgment,’’ ‘‘that those who cannot see may see; and 
that those who can see should become blind.’’ Involuntar- 
ily, it would seem, Jesus became the world’s judge. ‘‘This 
is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and 
men loved darkness rather than light.’’ To make it still 
more certain that the blindness is understood as spiritual, 
John refers to the familiar statement of Jesus concerning 
the Pharisees as ‘‘blind leaders’’ of the ‘‘blind’’ (Mat. 
xv, 14). 

So, when the Pharisees ask (40) in utter incredulity, 
‘*Are we also blind?’’ the answer, on the above principle, 
is a straight affirmative. Before the coming of Jesus, the 
representatives of old-line Judaism possessed as much light 
and as good sight, perhaps, as any people in the world. 
After the coming with Jesus of the new light that lighteth 
the way into life eternal, the sight that was in them and 
the light by which they had been seeing was turned into 
darkness and blindness. Similarly, many who had been 
blind compared to them in the old order had had that life- 
long blindness cured by ‘‘belief in him.’’ 


CHAPTER XII 


THE GOOD SHEPHERD 
JOHN X 


x, 1. Any man who does not enter the sheepfold 
through the door, but climbs over at some other place, 
is a thief and a robber. 2. But the man who enters by 
the door is the shepherd. 3. And the sheep listen to 
his voice; and he calls to his own sheep by name, and 
leads them out. 4. He goes in front of them, and the 
sheep follow him, because they know his voice. 5. And 
they will not follow a stranger, but will run from him— 
because they do not recognize the voice of strangers. 
6. This Jesus said figuratively but they did not under- 
stand what he meant below the surface. 

7. I am the door of the sheep. 8. All who came before 
me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear 
them. 9. I am the door; if any man enters in through 
me he will be saved, and will go in and out, and find 
pasture. 10. The thief comes only to steal, and kill, 
and destroy: I come that they may have life, and may 
have it abundantly. 11. I am the good shepherd: the 
good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. 12. The 
man who is hired, and is not a shepherd, sees a wolf 
coming, and leaves the sheep, and runs away; and the 
wolf snatches them: 13. because he is a hired man, and 
does not care about the sheep. 14. I am the good shep- 
herd; and I know my own, and my own know me; 15. 
and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16. And other 
sheep I have, which are not ¢f this fold: I must lead 
them, also, and they will hear my voice. 17. This is 
why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life. 

174 


Ch. 10, 1-18 THE Goop SHEPHERD 175 


18. No one took it from me; I lay it down of myself. I 
have power to lay it down and I have power to take it 
back again. This is the commandment I received from 
the Father. 


In chapter x John again goes for his illustration straight 
to the daily life of the common people of Ephesus. Bread 
and water were ideal subjects from which to draw re- 
ligious lessons, because then, as now, they were daily 
necessities. Blindness was far more familiar than in Amer- 
ica or in any European country. Sheep and shepherd 
belong in the same class. They were as unavoidable as 
is the telephone or the automobile today. 

This chapter, like preceding ones, is a talk, but it takes 
as its starting point a paragraph from the teaching rather 
than an act out of the life of Jesus. The distinctive feature 
is this use in place of an incident or event, of a parable. 
This parable, however, is handled in the same way, 12.e., 
it is told for the sake of the symbolism introduced by John 
to tie it up with the life of Ephesus and make the parable 
a vehicle of truth for the guidance of the Ephesian Chris- 
tians. The author worked and talked in a time when men 
might be put to the supreme test any day; for persecution 
was a constant possibility and often a grim reality. The 
times called for a warning against the many ephemeral 
teachers (1-6) who recklessly preached a gospel of revolt 
until the heavy hand of Rome fell when they flinched and 
fled and left their dupes in the lurch (7-13). John takes 
full advantage of the opportunity thus given him to intro- 
duce into his talk a very intense and instructive interpre- 
tation of the death of Jesus (14-18). 

The basis of the whole talk, the foundation for all its 
symbolism, is the parable of the lost sheep. The shepherd 
of a hundred sheep, having lost one of them, goes after that 
which is lost until he finds it. And when he has found 
it he lays it on his shoulder, rejoicing. 

In naming the shepherd of the lost sheep, Jesus, the 


176 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


picturesque scenery and the popular appeal of the twenty- 
third Psalm are drawn in to enrich his exposition. ‘‘The 
Lord is my shepherd’’ (John x, 11, 14). He makes me 
to lie down in green ‘‘pastures’’ (John x, 9). ‘‘The pres- 
ence of mine enemies’’ parallels the ‘‘strangers’’ (John 
x, 5) and the ‘‘wolf’’ (John x, 12). The ‘‘shadow of 
death’’ is paired with the ‘‘kill and destroy’’ of verse 10, 
and also the picture of the good shepherd laying down his 
life (x, 15). Incidentally, the shadow of death calls up 
its opposite, ‘‘Life’’ (x, 10), which is the basic word of 
this Gospel. 

The figure of Jesus as the ‘‘door’’ is closely allied to 
Luke xiii, 24, ‘‘strive to enter in through the narrow door.’’ 
The ‘‘door’’ is in John the concrete equivalent of ‘‘through 
Jesus,’’ a fundamental phrase in Paul’s thought. It is 
through Jesus that God saves us. Through Jesus we have 
“faecess’’ to the Father (Rom. v, 2; Eph. u, 18). In 
John it is through belief in Jesus, and the union with him 
which follows in its train that we make the transition 
from ordinary human into the divine Life. He is the 
door through which ‘‘if any man enter in, he will be 
saved .. . and will find pasture (corresponds to bread in 
the talk on the Bread of Life) . . . and have life. . . and 
have it abundantly’’ (9, 10). 

The first six verses of John x may be taken as an alle- 
gory. A parable when supplied with symbolism as the 
parable of the Lost Sheep has here been supplied with the 
symbolism of the Door tends to become an allegory. AI- 
legory was by no means uncommon in the first century. 
Paul uses it more than once (Cf., Gal. iv, 24). Most of 
Jesus’ stories, however, were true parables. The distinc- 
tion acquires importance in a study of the synoptic gos- 
pels. In a parable all the words are meant to be taken 
in their literal meaning; and the story has a single lesson 
or moral which is its ‘‘teaching.’’ Here in John x the 
words are meant to be taken not in a literal, but in a fig- 
urative and metaphorical sense. 


Ch. 10, 1-18 THE Goop SHEPHERD 170 


The ‘‘I’’ style imparts to verses 7-18 a tone of con- 
fession and prayer which becomes an important element. 
(See also the comments on John v, 20-29.) Plato in the 
Dialogues shows Socrates asking and answering questions 
in the same way that John pictures Jesus speaking these 
words, ‘‘I am the Good Shepherd.’’ The very common use 
of this ‘‘I’’ style has been noted in our introductory chap- 
ter on the ‘‘Popular Quality of the Gospel.’’ It was very 
familiar to the people of Ephesus. One of Deissmann’s 
examples * is an inscription reproducing a bit of the liturgy 
of the Isis cult: 

‘‘Tsis am I, the lord of every land. I was instructed 
by Hermes and with him invented the Demotic alphabet. 
... 1 gave men their laws which no man ean change. I 
am the oldest daughter of Kronos.... For me the city 
Bubastis was built. I separated the earth from the sky, 
I showed the stars their paths. I set the course of sun 


and moon.... I made Right to be Might.... I gave 
the commandment that parents should be loved by their 
children... . I made justice stronger than gold and silver. 


I gave commandment that truth should be recognized as 
beautiful. ’’ 

Hosts of humble, sincere preachers today enter on the 
work of a new parish in the same frame of mind as St. 
Paul, who said, ‘‘I am determined not to know anything 
among you save Jesus Christ.’’ They have the most abso- 
lute conviction that the heart of their message has Jesus” 
‘in person back of it. Daring as it is to the verge of the 
appalling for them to say so, they are eager to ery it from 
the house-tops that it is ‘‘not I but Christ that speaketh’’ 
this Gospel to you. But it all must be done in the third 
person. They do not dream of committing the shocking 
irreverence of putting their version of the Gospel on the 
lips of Jesus. And their congregations are a unit in ap- 
proving this attitude. That passionate devotion to Jesus 
of every humble, sincere preacher today was shared in all 

Tight from the Ancient Hast, chap. II, 3, H. 


178 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


points save one by this Christian preacher of Ephesus. 
He did not have to put his Gospel in the third person. He 
could and did put his version of the Gospel on the lips of 
Jesus and his congregation were a unit in their approval 
of his course. The common use of the ‘‘I’’ style in his 
time made all that world of difference possible. 

To recover the original religious tone of verses 7-18 
the following is a good plan: First, insert the word 
‘“Jesus’’ in every instance in place of the pronoun ‘‘I’’; 
then, after reading the paragraph in this form, substitute 
‘‘thou’’ and ‘‘thee,’’ and read the paragraph in an atti- 
tude of prayer; finally read the verses as John puts them 
in the first person, keeping in mind the eulogy character 
of the form taken by them in the first reading and the 
prayer-attitude given to them by the second reading. Here 
is an attempt to work out these suggestions in the present 
instance: 

7. Jesus is the door of the sheep. 8. All who came 
before him (in Ephesus) were thieves and robbers. 9. He 
is the door; if any man enters in through him he will find 
pasture. 10. The thief comes only to steal: Jesus came 
that we might have life more abundant. 11. Jesus is the 
good shepherd: the good shepherd lays down his life for 
his sheep. 14. He knows his own and his own know him. 
16. Still other sheep he has: he will lead them also and 
they will hear his voice. 17. This is the reason the Father 
loved Jesus because he laid down his life. 18. No one 
took it from him, but he laid it down himself. 

Then, in an attitude of prayer: 

7. Thou art the door of the sheep. 8. They that came 
before thee were thieves and robbers. 9. Thou art the 
door; if any man enter in through thee he shall find pas- 
ture. 10. The thief comes that he may steal: thou hast 
come that we might have life and have it abundantly. 
11. Thou art the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth 
down his life for his sheep. 14. Thou knowest thine own 
and thine own know thee. 16. Other sheep of other folds 


Ch. 10, 1-18 THE Goop SHEPHERD 179 


thou also hast; them too thou wilt lead, and they shall 
hear thy voice. 17. Therefore doth the Father love thee 
because thou hast laid down thy life. 18. No one took it 
from thee; thou didst lay it down of thyself. 

Then call to mind Paul’s words in which he describes 
himself as an ‘‘ambassador’’ and sense his feeling of the 
presence of Jesus speaking through him in his words, ‘‘It 
is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me’’ (Gal. 
ii, 20). Remember how Jesus said, ‘‘The Holy Spirit will 
teach you in that hour what you shall say.’’ Focus your 
mind and hold it fast to the words of John xv, 4, **‘ Abide in 
me and I in you.’’ Caught up into these moods, now go 
back and read this passage as it stands once more as an 
expression on the part of this Christian preacher of Ephe- 
sus that the heart of his message has Jesus in person 
back of it: 

7. Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the 
sheep. 8. All that came before me are thieves and robbers. 
9. I am the door; by me, if any man enter in, he shall find 
pasture. 10. The thief cometh that he may steal: I am 
come that they may have life and have it abundantly. 11. 
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down 
his life for the sheep: 14. and I know mine own, and mine 
own know me. 16. And other sheep I have: them also I 
shall lead, and they shall hear my voice. 17. There- 
fore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my 
life. 18. No one taketh it from me, but I lay it down of 
myself. 

Verses 7-13 read in this attitude of reverent adoration, 
glow with a warmth which shows them to be the product 
of personal gratitude carried to the pitch of incandescence. 
Out of gratitude to the Shepherd who had led him out of a 
life that was a living death, into a life that was a deathless 
form of living, Paul could not find hours enough in the 
day nor men and women enough to listen to his story of 
how he found the only true Shepherd our race has pro- 
duced, for he leads his sheep into a pastured life whose 


180 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


invigoration never gives out. With a depth of adoring 
which many of us believe exceeded Paul’s, and in the same 
spirit of self-effacement, this Christian preacher of Ephe- 
sus longed that his hearers might become so enamored of 
Jesus, like himself, that they would forget the preacher and 
hear only Jesus’ words of shepherding care. 

Verses 14-18 carry a step further the explanation of 
Jesus’ death already put forth by implication in the choice 
of the figure of the shepherd. In early Christian days, 
one chief problem set the defender of the Christian faith 
was how to account for the death of Jesus. In Ephesus 
one of the main issues was the question: How could a 
man crucified as a criminal be the incarnation of God’s 
Spirit? The Jews made the most of their advantage here. 
Moses was a great law-giver and a man of God; and when 
he came to the end of his life God took him up into heaven. 
But this Jesus God allowed to be crucified between two 
thieves. 

People love John’s Gospel today more than they do 
the Epistle to the Hebrews, which offers a theological ex- 
planation of the death of Jesus. John’s way was not the 
way of purely theological speculation. He gave men and 
women a simple picture which might be carried easily 
and securely in the heart, as a beloved image is carried 
in a locket. Why did Jesus die on the cross? Because, 
like a shepherd, he lost his life in defense of his sheep (15). 
What answer could be more readily understood, more easily 
remembered, or more satisfying in its significance? 

The closeness of this shepherd’s relation to his sheep is 
expressed in verse 14 and partakes of the mutually inter- 
penetrating quality always present in the word ‘‘know’’ in 
the Gospel of John. ‘‘I know my own and my own know 
me’’ refers to no mere technical knowledge, nor is it merely 
equivalent to ‘‘recognize.’’ When a man says that he can 
trust his friend to be loyal in an emergency because he 
‘‘knows’’ him, or when some one says, in vouching for 


Ch. 10, 1-18 THE Goop SHEPHERD 181 


another, he has ‘‘known’’ his friend twenty years, such 
usage of the word carries a faint suggestion of the practi- 
cal, conerete intimacy which John puts into the word. 

‘*Other sheep I have,’’ spoken from the Jerusalem point 
of view looking out over the world, takes in, of course, 
the Ephesian flock. But from the Ephesian point of view 
it becomes an invitation to espouse the wider missionary 
spirit of the Christian Church. Jesus died in defense of his 
sheep, not the sheep of Galilee, nor the lost sheep of the 
house of Israel, but for the Christian circle in Ephesus; 
and yet not for them only, but for all those other sheep 
who shall hear his voice (16) and shall look to him for 
help. 

‘‘This is why the Father loves me.’’ Verse 17 is the 
chapter’s high peak and the supreme explanation of the 
significance of Jesus’ death. In answer to the Jews’ 
charge that Jesus’ death was a mark of God’s disfavor 
John is not content with a mere negative defense. He 
takes the aggressive with a positive appeal to that undying 
disposition in men to put in a class by himself one who 
dies in their defense or who risks his life to save others in 
time of danger. Why should God care especially still for 
Abraham or Moses? They had received their reward. It 
is the one who sacrifices his life for others whom God loves 
supremely and is determined that he shall see of the travail 
of his soul and be satisfied. They must not think that Jesus 
died because his executioners willed it. There was no power 
on earth that could have put him to death without his 
consent. Men for once were left out of his reckoning. 
They did not do his death to him nor did he do it for them. 
His death was his last bit of self-denial, his final proof of 
loving subjection to God, and the Father loved him for it, 
meeting this love of Jesus for him at its highest with his 
own highest love in return for Jesus. Such is the lofty 
view of the transaction of the Cross taken by this Christian 
preacher of Ephesus. 


182 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


THE SON OF GOD 
JOHN X, 22-39 


x, 24. The Jews gathered around him and said, If 
you are the Christ, tell us so plainly. 25. Jesus replied, 
The work that I am doing in my Father’s name bears 
testimony to me. 26. But you do not believe, because 
you are not of my sheep. 27. My sheep listen to my 
voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28. and I 
give them eternal life. 30. I and the Father are one. 

31. The Jews picked up stones with which to- stone 
him. 32. Jesus said, Many good works I have shown 
you from the Father; for which of those works are you 
stoning me? 33. The Jews answered, We are not ston- 
ing you for your good works, but because you who are 
only a man make yourself out to be God. 34. Jesus an- 
swered, Is it not written in your Law, ‘‘I said, You are 
gvods’’? 86. Can you say I am blaspheming, because I 
said I am a son of God? 387. If I am not doing the 
works of my Father, do not believe me. 38. But if I 
am doing them, even if you will not believe me, believe 
the works: that you may know and understand that the 
Father is in me and I in the Father. 


Verses 22-39 continue to discuss Jesus under the figure 
of the shepherd. Two particular questions which John’s 
audience would naturally have in mind are taken up. The 
first is subordinate to the second. The first question is: 
If Jesus is the Christ, why do not the Jews accept their 
own long promised Messiah (22-81)? The second question 
is: How can Christians assert that a man of Galilee is 
Son of God (32-38) ? 

In verse 24 the Jews ask Jesus to end their suspense, 
and tell them frankly if he is the Christ. The answer put 
on the lips of Jesus is that since he has told and they will 
not believe him, perhaps the fact that his works reflect the 
character of God will prove acceptable witness to them 


Ch. 10, 22-39 Tue Son or Gop 183 


(25). The Jews do not understand that God is love, or 
they would recognize God’s ‘‘voice’’ of love in Jesus (27). 
This question of the rejection of Israel as a penalty brought 
upon itself by its rejection of Jesus was one of Paul’s 
greatest puzzles. He devotes three chapters of his Epistle 
to the Romans to the expression of his ‘‘heart’s desire’’ 
that the Jews may yet be saved (Rom. ix-xi). Paul’s solu- 
tion of his puzzle was to maintain that God still was 
minded to include the Jews in the Christian fold. But in 
Ephesus this solution did not seem a very immediate 
prospect. John’s interest was in the present situation with 
which he had to deal; and hostility then between Jewish 
synagogue and Christian communion was keen. Growing 
hostility is shown to be the state of affairs throughout the 
Book of Acts. As a working basis for his own solution 
John’s picture of the shepherd was a very effective one. 
‘You do not believe, because you are not of my sheep.”’ 
Jesus saves all who have enough of the love of God in their 
hearts to listen to the voice of his love as it falls from the 
lips of Jesus and follow him (27); and to them he gives 
eternal life (28). The conduct of the Jews gives the lie to 
their boast that the God of love is their God when they 
turn their backs on the voice of God’s love as it falls from 
the lips of Jesus. In that high, substantial and exalted 
sense he and the Father are one. 

This comparison between Jesus and the Father (30) leads 
in verses 32-38 to what may be said to be the supreme 
question of our religion. How can a man of Galilee be 
“Son of God’’? This question is answered first from the 
Jewish point of view (34-36) and then from the point of 
view of the Greeks of Ephesus (37, 38). Incidentally the 
first answer must have contained some help also for Greeks 
who knew something of Jewish terminology; so that both 
were cogent and forceful reples to make in Ephesus. 

The term ‘‘Son of God’’ led to much misunderstanding 
and consequent controversy in the early Church. Jews, 
e.g., the Jews of Ephesus, could not accept the term in the: 


184 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Greek sense of intimate union with Deity, because that 
would be in conflict with their traditional view of God’s 
isolation. Greeks could not understand the term in the 
Jewish sense, because that implied that God and man wear 
the same image, which to Greeks was an impossible idea. 
The difficulty involved in this difference of point of view 
not only explains the declining success of Christian work 
among the Jews in Ephesus, but in large measure explains 
the age-long estrangement of Jew and Christian. 

Verses 34-36 make the Jewish meaning of the term ‘‘Son 
of God’’ the point of departure in giving the first answer. 
Throughout Hebrew literature we find the terms ‘‘chil- 
dren of God’’ and ‘‘sons of God’’ used in the simple sense 
of the well-known beatitude, ‘‘ Blessed are the peacemakers: 
for they shall be called sons of God’’ (Mat. v, 9). If 
others are called sons of God, the argument here runs, 
why should not Jesus be ealled son of God? (The usual 
article ‘‘the’’ before son is lacking in verse 36.) More- 
over, in one passage the Psalmist rises to the thought that 
if men are ‘‘children of God’’ in any vital sense they are 
in reality and potentially ‘‘gods’’ (Psalm lxxx, 6). This 
is the passage quoted in verse 34. Certainly with such 
sanction for it in their own Scriptures no Jew ought to 
object to the application of the term to Jesus. 

In fact, in the early days of Jewish Christianity before 
the Christian gospel was translated into Greek no objec- 
tion was raised to the term ‘‘son of God.’’ Then, it was 
the term Messiah or Christ that aroused Jewish ire when 
applied to Jesus. It was to the Greek sense of the term 
‘‘son of God’’ that the Jew (in Ephesus) displayed stren- 
uous objection. That title in Greek implied an actual 
parental relationship. Jewish traditional views of Jehovah 
were extremely monotheistic. The bare idea that Jehovah 
could beget a son, 7.e., have progeny in any sense akin to 
mortals, was to the Jews altogether incredible. In contrast 
to the Greek, the Jew thought of God as an actual concrete 
person in the ‘‘image’’ and ‘‘likeness’’ of a man (Gen. i, 


Ch. 10, 22-39 THE Son oF Gop 185 


26, 27), but living in heaven and almighty in power. The 
thought that this Person could undergo the experience of 
parentage in begetting a son was inconsistent with the 
Jewish idea of the holiness and transcendence of God. 
It constituted an insoluble problem for the extreme mono- 
theism of the Jews because it seemed to them to imply 
the possibility of two persons in the Godhead. 

But the Greek, long trained in philosophy and moral 
science, easily grasped the idea that the parentage involved 
is not a parentage of the flesh nor has it anything to do 
with the flesh, but is a parentage of the spirit. God, the 
all-pervading immanent spirit enters into man and, if wel- 
comed, begets in him a divine life. This Greek idea that 
God ‘‘is not far from each one of us’’ (Acts xvii, 27), if 
we, too, are spirit, made it particularly easy for the Greek 
to adopt the Christian word Father and the Christian idea 
of the fatherhood of God. They could be reminded that 
their ‘‘own poets have said: For we are also his offspring,’’ 
2.€., spirit of his Spirit (Acts xvii, 28). Thus calling Jesus 
son of God offered no stumbling-block to the Greek if the 
fact was manifest that the immanent God had really entered 
into him and by the parentage of the spirit generated in 
him a divine life. (Compare the statement of Epictetus 
quoted in our comments on the Prologue, that we are 
‘‘fragments of God.’’) Neither Jew nor Greek had any 
difficulty over his own definition of the term ‘‘son of God’’; 
and neither could endure the significance attached to the 
same term by the other. 

Thus verses 37, 38 contain the second answer, intended 
for the Greeks, in defense of the title ‘‘son of God’’ as 
an appropriate one for Jesus. If his ‘‘works’’ (37) shows 
the presence in him of the Father Spirit, Jesus had earned 
the right to be called ‘‘son of God.’’ Men are not asked 
*‘to believe on’’ Jesus because of any words spoken by 
him about his relation to the Father; his all-important 
eredentials, says this Christian preacher of Ephesus to his 
hearers, are the men and women of your own acquaintance 


186 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


who by ‘‘belief on him’’ through the parentage of the 
spirit have passed from death to life eternal and taken 
their places alongside this second Adam as sons of God, 
too. 

There is much divergence of opinion as to the meaning 
of the word ‘‘work’’ or ‘‘works’’ in the Gospel of John. 
The plain inference here is that the works are a sufficient 
substitute basis of faith for those not able to be convinced 
on Jesus’ word. Do ‘‘works’’ in this sense refer merely 
to the miracles of Jesus? Were the Palestine miracles the 
chief testimony to his Sonship for the hearers of this Chris- 
tian preacher of Ephesus? Today, Jesus is practically the 
only one left, we believe, who ever in history performed 
a miracle, and the number recorded of him is a very small 
one. But hardly a day passed for these hearers of Ephesus 
without the news of some miracle that had taken place the 
day before within a hundred miles done by still another 
wonder-worker. Under these circumstances, miracles like 
the Palestine miracles were too common in the vicinity of 
Ephesus for much convert-making power to be extracted 
from them. Nowhere in the Gospel do we find a direct 
statement that the Palestine miracles proved Jesus was 
from God. In John y, 36 (see comments there) we 
read: ‘‘The works which the Father has given me to 
accomplish. . . bear testimony... that the Father has 
sent me.’’ What are the works? There are many indi- 
cations that the works which the evangelist has in mind 
are the ‘‘works’’ which the living Jesus was accomplishing 
in Ephesus. The story of the blind man concludes with 
the statement that since the world began it was never 
heard that any one opened the eyes of a man born blind 
(ix, 82). Viewing that sermon as a whole there can be 
no doubt that it sets no store by the miracle involved in this 
specific instance of the recovery of physical sight save as 
it serves as a symbol of the countless eye-opening ‘‘works’’ 
of Jesus in giving light to men spiritually blind from birth 
year after year since. 


Ch. 10, 22-39 THE Son oF Gop 187 


It might be said that there are in John two classes of 
‘‘works’’ which may be viewed as ‘‘testimony’’ to the 
divine mission of Jesus. In class one are those works which 
in the present chapter are called ‘‘good works’’ (382). 
In this class belong also ‘‘the works of my Father’’ (37) 
and ‘‘works’’ which show that the Father is ‘‘in’’ him and 
he ‘‘in the Father’’ (38). This numberless host of daily 
ministrations of Jesus in the days of his flesh constituted 
an overpowering witness to his divine mission for those 
privileged to be present when they were performed. The 
intensely practical bent of mind of this Christian preacher 
of Ephesus crops out here again. At their distance in 
time and space from Palestine and the days of Jesus in 
the flesh, he makes bold to say to his hearers that ‘‘ works’’ 
belonging to class two form the most convincing witness 
to the divine mission of Jesus, 7.e., the first-hand testimony 
of spiritual miracles of Christian experience in the lives 
of men and women of their acquaintance in Ephesus. It 
is doubtful whether the author ever points to a wonder 
in and of itself, 2.e., a supernatural marvel per se as proof 
of Jesus’ mission. Some would even say that because of 
the currency of miracle stories in other religions in Ephesus 
John used the fewest possible and then only for the symbol 


they contained of the miracles of conversion occurring in 
Ephesus. 


CHAPTER XIII 


DEATH AND LIFE 
JOHN XI 


xi, 1. Now there was a man who was sick, Lazarus 
of Bethany, of the village of Mary and her sister Mar- 
tha. 2. And it was that Mary who anointed the Lord 
with ointment. 4. When Jesus heard it, he said, This 
sickness is not to end in death, but is for the glory of 
God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it. 
5. Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. 
7. So he says to the disciples, Let us go back to Judea. 
8. The disciples say, The Jews have just been trying to 
stone you; and are you going back there? 9. Jesus 
answered, If a man walks in the daytime he does not 
stumble, because he can see the light of this world. 10. 
But if he walks in the night he stumbles, because he has 
no light. 11. After a while he added, Our friend Laz- 
arus has fallen asleep. 12. The disciples said, If he has 
fallen asleep he will recover. 14. So Jesus told them 
plainly, Lazarus is dead. 17. When Jesus reached the 
place he found that Lazarus had been in the tomb four 
days. 

21. Martha said to Jesus, Master, if you had been here 
my brother would not have died. 23. Jesus says to her, 
Your brother shall rise again. 24. Martha says, I know 
he will rise in the resurrection at the Last Day. 25. 
Jesus said, I am the resurrection and the life: he who 
believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live; 26. and 
he who lives and believes in me shall never die. 

32. Mary also, when she came, fell at his feet saying, 

188 


Ch. 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 189 


Master, if you had been here my brother would not 
have died. 33. When Jesus saw her weeping, and the 
Jews weeping also, he was troubled, 34. and said, Where 
have you laid him? They say to him, Come and see. 
35. Jesus wept. 37. Some of them said, Could not this 
man who opened the eyes of the blind man have also 
kept Lazarus from dying? 39. Jesus says, Move the 
stone away. Martha says, Master, by this time decay 
has set in, for he has been dead four days. 43. And 
Jesus called in a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. 44. 
The dead man came forth, bound hand and foot with 
grave-cloths. Jesus says, Loose him and let him go. 

47. The Pharisees gathered a council and said, What 
are we going todo? This man is showing so many signs. 
48. If we let him alone every one will believe in him, 
and then the Romans will come and take our city. 49. 
Caiaphas, who was high priest, said, 50. It is better that 
one man should die for the people, rather than that 
the whole nation perish. 51. Being high priest, he 
prophesied unknowingly that Jesus was to die for the 
nation, 52. and not for the nation only, but that he 
might also unite in one body the children of God scat- 
tered far and wide. 


The story of the raising of Lazarus has involved many 
a Bible student in more difficulty and question than any 
other chapter of John’s Gospel. If chapter vi is the easiest 
to understand, this one is the hardest. Fortunately just 
here much new material has recently come to hand which 
will in time remove many previous obstacles. This is par- 
ticularly fortunate because the principle on which John 
is at work in this chapter is the supreme truth of his 
Gospel and of his years of preaching. In fact, three 
superlatives apply to this chapter; it contains the greatest 
difficulty, it receives most light from modern research, it 
presents the most fundamental truth of John’s religion. 

John’s expositions of his two basic words, ‘‘Light’’ and 


190 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


‘‘Life,’’ take as their point of departure a story from the 
Palestinian memorabilia of Jesus, in the one case the heal- 
ing of the blind man, and in the other the raising of 
Lazarus. Of the two words, Life is the more inclusive 
and the central one. The present chapter runs in many 
particulars parallel to that of the blind man. The blind- 
ness was ‘‘from his birth.’’ Lazarus ‘‘had been in the 
tomb four days.’’ The story of the blind man is punctu- 
ated and interpreted at its middle point by ‘‘I am the 
Light’’ (ix, 5); the story of Lazarus is interpreted at its 
middle point by ‘‘I am the Life’’ (xi, 25). 

In the older view, two principal purposes or truths were 
embedded in the story. First, John wished to prove by 
his use of it the supernatural power of the earthly Jesus. 
He meant his hearers to construe the raising of Lazarus 
as an accomplishment beyond the power of any super- 
naturally unaided human being. In the second place, in 
the older view we are meant to understand from it that 
the human soul lives after death so conditioned that it may 
at any time reenter the body it has forsaken even though 
that body be already in a state of ‘‘decay’’ (39). Both 
these religious values thus obtained were very precious 
to early Christians. In commenting on the catacomb paint- 
ings of the raising of Lazarus, Lamberton says: ‘‘It was 
a pleasant hope in which to die, this hope that Christ 
himself would call his servants from the catacombs as he 
had called Lazarus from his tomb.’’ On a trip through 
the catacombs of Rome it is still possible to count over 
fifty pictured likenesses of Lazarus in those underground 
passages. 

The contribution of material that has recently come to 
hand to the understanding of the story of the raising of 
Lazarus is far-reaching and fundamental. Practically all 
the results of research into the mystery religions has a 
direct or indirect bearing upon this chapter. In particular 
the native religion of the heart of Asia Minor, the Mys- 
teries of Attis, throws light upon the thoughts that the 


Ch, 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 191 


people of Ephesus were thinking in regard to life here 
and hereafter. 

The principal annual festival of this religion in its 
primitive days was held every spring at the turn of the 
seasons from winter to summer. It was essentially a cele- 
bration of the passing of the cold inanimateness of the 
winter and the warming up of the life and the coming 
back of fruitfulness with the spring. All nature rejoiced, 
and few men could resist the impulse to share in the glad- 
ness. On a set day the people went forth into a grove and 
chose the ceremonial tree. A pine tree was selected because 
its winter foliage conveyed a suggestion of the persistence 
of life. This tree was cut down and was then enswathed 
tightly so that it looked like a corpse wrapped for its 
burial. It was carried by the priests in popular proces- 
sion to the temple of the deity and buried with pomp and 
ceremony. On a future day, the great day of the festival, 
the pine tree was taken from its grave, the grave-cloths 
were loosed, the pine tree appeared in life again, and the 
people gave themselves over to unlimited gayety in cele- 
bration of the return once more of the springtime life and 
gladness. 

The legend on which this ceremony rested tells how the 
goddess Cybele lost her youthful and handsome lover, who 
had killed himself for her sake. She mourned until the 
gods took pity upon her and restored her beloved Attis to 
life again. Her joy was unmeasured at receiving her 
lover back. Cybele represented mother Earth, Attis the 
germinating power of life. Thus the returning freshness 
and beauty of the earth at the coming of the spring was 
allegorized into an appealing love story. 

From early days the ceremonies spoke through certain 
turns of the allegory of a life after death for the indi- 
vidual. The new life of nature in the springtime after 
the deathlikeness of the winter was both symbol and proof 
that a man though he die yet shall he live. As the Mys- 
teries of Attis developed from a primitive into a more 


192 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


mature religion, part of the instruction which all initiates 
received was intended to insure them safe passage from 
this life into the circle of the blessed in the after world. 

In New Testament times along with other mystery re- 
ligions it had acquired a distinctly mystical note of a 
personal, very practical character. Bits of liturgy and 
ceremony extant show plainly that the participant in the 
Attis mysteries came away feeling that at the time of the 
ceremony a new power flowed into him, giving him new 
strength and new life. (See comments on John iii, 3.) 
The legend of the restoration of Attis became a type or 
symbol of the restoration to pristine zest of life possible 
to the world-weary. The blossoming of the dead earth 
each year into the virgin freshness of primeval days be- 
came a token that a man’s life, whatever his age, is des- 
tined to reblossom after every period of winter and of 
cold—even after the winter of death. 

The national ancestral Greek religion, the Eleusinian 
Mysteries, centered its ritual around the familiar legend 
of Persephone, a beautiful young maiden. She was gath- 
ering flowers in the fields one day as Aides or Pluto, the 
god of the underworld, happened to pass by. He fell in 
love with Persephone and carried her away to the world 
of the dead where he made her his queen. Her mother, 
Demeter, symbolic of mother Earth, carried her grief to 
Zeus, the ‘‘father of gods and men,’’ who called Pluto to 
account for his theft. Pluto’s reply was to the effect that 
possession is nine points of the law. The matter was 
finally settled by a compromise. Persephone was to spend 
six months of each year with her captor in the world of 
the dead; then she was to be allowed to return to the 
world of the living to spend the other six months with 
her mother. 

It is easy to see and admire the effectiveness of the sym- 
bolism of the story. The joy and bloom of the spring- 
time mirror a mother’s happiness at the return of her 
daughter from the world of the dead. Another legend, the 


Ch. 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 193 


legend of Orpheus, who, after he had won permission by 
his beautiful music to visit the world of the dead, brought 
back his beloved Euridice to the threshold of life, was also 
widely used as the basis of religious ceremonial in Greece. 
But Persephone was the central figure. Her restoration 
to life, her liberation from the power of death, became the 
basis of instruction in the Eleusinian Mysteries by which 
its initiates were not only assured of immortality, but 
posted so well in regard to the underworld that they would 
be able to find their way through the purlieus of Hades 
into the abode of the blessed. They would go through the 
winter of death only to emerge into a springtime of new 
life. 

Furthermore, the Eleusinian Mysteries as a religion em- 
phasized the change wrought in a man by this assurance 
of a blessed future. Aristophanes gives us a side glance 
at it: ‘* All we who have been initiated and live in a pious 
way.’’* <An initiated member found that he had a firmer 
erip upon life and its possible triumph over death. His 
character was strengthened; his self-control was increased ; 
his sense of brotherhood with his fellow members was in- 
tensified. To this was added the mystical note of Stoicism, 
particularly in the last century before Christ. This con- 
tribution of Stoicism may be defined as (a) the practice 
and belief that God is an immanent divine spirit dwelling 
in the world; and (b) that men by opening their hearts 
can gain access to him and receive unto themselves a full- 
ness of life which will raise them above all the suffering 
of the world and the flesh and death. If they thus live 
the life possessed of that fullness here upon earth, that 
life will take them naturally and easily through the gate- 
way of death into the bosom of the divine. 

A third mystery religion, the Mysteries of Isis, was also 
widely influential in the Roman Empire in the first cen- 
tury. This religion had its origin in Egypt, where the 
heat of summer is as much to be feared as the cold of 

1See Case, pp. 294-5. 


194 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


winter. Th2 regular annual overflowing of the Nile was 
the indispensable basis of their existence. Every year the 
Nile, in flood, spread over the valley carrying destruction 
in its path. Yet this which at its overflowing was such a 
terror became on its subsidence the source of life, for in 
its path, vegetation sprang up and thrived in what would 
have been but a piece of the Sahara desert. 

The religion of Isis made this Nile flood a basis for 
teaching that out of death comes life, that our physical 
death is like the terror of the floods, that when the waters 
of death have receded life will blossom in renewed fresh- 
ness and fruitfulness. As this religion aged, it developed 
the same personal, very practical character noted in the 
other mystery religions. As surely as the overflow of the 
Nile which lays low and destroys is followed by the re- 
ceding waters which bring life, so surely shall despair 
and difficulty and moral apathy recede for a man upon 
his entrance into the religion of Isis; and out of that 
recession shall come a newness of life and a fullness of 
living as far above the old life as the green fields of Egypt 
are more to be desired than the desert and the flood. 

But again in the Mysteries of Isis, as in the other mys- 
tery religions, connection is made between a natural event 
and the religious lesson drawn from it by a bridge of 
legend. Its ritual, which became so popular in Greek lands, 
told the story of Isis and Osiris. The old Egyptian legend 
symbolizing the after fruitfulness of the Nile flood told 
how Isis, the queen goddess, had a lover named Osiris. 
At the death of Osiris she was inconsolable. The passing 
days made it plain that her grief would not be pacified 
until her lover was finally restored to life again. At 
this early stage, the restoration of Osiris symbolized the - 
receding waters in whose wake the beautiful spring vege- 
tation appeared; in the developed religion the restoration 
of Osiris as standing for the recession of the Nile flood 
advanced another stage as a symbol denoting now the power 
of this religion, when the despairs of life or the flood 


Ch. 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 195 


of death come down upon us to overwhelm, to effect the 
recession of that flood and cause the beauteous new life 
to appear. 

The Mysteries of Attis, the Eleusinian Mysteries, the 
Mysteries of Isis, all emphasize this same basic teaching 
that death is the door to life, as winter is the door to 
spring. A fourth body of religious teaching, the Hermetic 
Mystery Literature, is also of value to us, for it gives the 
vocabulary employed to fill in this conception of the super- 
ior divine life which men may receive in the present 
through communion with the Divine Spirit." Throughout 
the Roman Empire, but particularly in Ephesus and Asia 
Minor, the substance of this teaching was current and 
common. 

The bearing of the widespread currency of this teaching 
on the understanding of the story of Lazarus is that John’s 
hearers would be interested in the story not as a proof of the 
supernatural power of the earthly Jesus, nor primarily as a 
proof of a resurrecton in the future. Instead, they would 
naturally and instinctively endeavor to interpret it by 
means of the interpretations in use among them of the story 
of Attis and the stories of the other religions mentioned. 
They would seek to understand it primarily as a message 
in regard to the winter death of ordinary existence and 
a following spring which would be an utter contrast in its 
vitality. This is all theory and unfulfilled desire with you, 
said John to them. It is glorious reality to these men 
and women of your acquaintance on whom this gift of 
eternal life has been bestowed through their belief in 
Jesus. 

Our whole Christian teaching in regard to the resur- 
rection and eternal life acquires a new and vivid con- 
ereteness in the Christian advantage taken by John of these 
religious developments which prepared the way for the 
Christian religion. To one who knows that history and 
the meaning of the terms which he puts to new Christian 

2 Case, p. 328. 


196 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


use, the resurrection life is not an aching desire, about 
which nothing can be done but wait; it is a fact of present 
experience. 

In the telling of the story of Lazarus, John does not state 
that he was himself present. He selects this day’s work 
out of the wealth of tradition concerning Jesus because 
of its striking convert-making possibilities in dealing with 
inquirers brought up in these mystery religions. The 
older view of the gospels that they were each composed 
in their entirety by one man has given way to a more 
democratic and social view of their authorship. They are 
now viewed as collections of the best information in cir- 
culation known to their respective authors at the time of 
their composition. Likewise, John selected with great re- 
ligious insight those stories which he felt were best cal- 
culated to reflect and impress the power of Jesus upon 
some considerable body of his hearers in Ephesus. ‘‘ Many 
other signs Jesus showed’’ (xx, 30). John could choose 
only a limited few. He chose this one because he saw tre- 
mendous significance for those of his audience trained in 
the mystery religions. Naturally, in the telling, he aimed 
to present its religious content in the way that they could 
get the most religious benefit from it. 

In its appealing picture of the human side of Jesus 
the story of Lazarus served another main interest of John 
which was to counteract a strong Ephesian tendency to 
over-emphasize Jesus’ deity at the expense of his humanity. 
The mention of Mary and Martha (Cf., Luk. x, 38 ff.) 
links the story with the synoptic tradition. The cross 
reference in verse 2, ‘‘that Mary who anointed the Lord,’’ 
is evidence again of the informal oral character of this 
Gospel. Its assumption of a knowledge of events which 
have not yet been narrated (Cf., also iii, 24) implies that 
other sermons had narrated and discussed these events. 
Another domestic touch of rare beauty is found in verse 5, 
‘* Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.’’ Inci- 
dentally, that word ‘‘loved’’ is the same form used in the 


Che 11) 1-62 DEATH AND LIFE 197 


reference to the ‘‘disciple whom Jesus loved’’ (Cf., xiii, 23). 
The purpose of John’s Gospel is that ‘‘you may have life’’ 
(xx, 31); and his purpose in the use of this particular 
narrative is ‘‘that the Son of God may be glorified’’ 
(xi, 4) as ‘‘the resurrection and the life’’ (25). 

Our inquiry into the mystery religions makes it clear that 
many of John’s hearers came hungry, with a hunger ac- 
quired elsewhere than from Christian sources, for a new 
and different life that would be life indeed. He proclaimed 
to them all that Jesus was that Life embodied and the 
secret of how to obtain the new and different life which 
they were seeking could be learned, therefore, from him 
alone. 

When his disciples take exception to his decision to 
respond to the eall of duty from the family at Bethany 
on the score that it will put his own life into jeopardy, 
Jesus replies to this effect: There are twelve hours in 
every day’s life of smooth sailing; and for getting about 
in those twelve hours, the light of guidance which is the 
product of prudential calculations seems to answer very 
well. But when the night of difficult and dangerous travel 
falls, then the worthlessness of that light as illumination is 
shown up by the way that the men who trust it stumble. 
For safe travel through the night of difficulty and danger, 
a man needs the light that lighteth the way into life eternal 
bestowed on those who ‘“‘believe on Jesus.”’ 

Verse 11 contains the word which Christians adopted 
throughout the Roman Empire as their word for the Chris- 
tian’s graduation from earth. They said of a man who 
was a Christian not that he was ‘‘dead,’’ but that he 
is fallen asleep (I Thess. iv, 18; Acts vii, 60). ‘‘Death’’ 
meant to them the deadness of ordinary existence (Rom. 
vii, 11, 13; I Tim. v, 6) in antithesis to Life which meant 
to them the life eternal whose invigoration will never give 
out. The misunderstanding voiced in verse 12 is like the 
misunderstanding of Nicodemus (ili, 4) or of the Samaritan 
woman (iv, 0). 


198 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Verses 18 ff. continue the narrative and lead up to the 
important and central theme in verses 23-27, which is the 
contrast between the older Christian teaching regarding 
the resurrection and the newer view of John’s day. 

The early Christian idea of the resurrection as reflected 
in the synoptic gospels was in close affiliation with the 
Old Testament and later Jewish conception. The Jews 
expected at that future day and date when Jehovah estab- 
lished his messianic kingdom all righteous Jews who had 
died would rise from Sheol and from their graves, to 
share in the triumph. The early Christian idea differed 
in that the blessings and joys of the kingdom which it 
magnified, also, were spiritual by nature rather than phys- 
ical. Paul came in contact with, and was influenced by, 
the Greek idea that as men have in them a spark of the 
divine which comes from God, their souls go at death not 
to Sheol, but into the presence of God. He speaks of 
‘‘having the desire to depart and be with Christ’’ (Phil. 
i, 23), an indication that he had come to think of the 
future life as non-physical. Yet he does not give up his 
Jewish idea of a day when men shall rise from their graves. 
He solves the problem of combining the two ideas, the 
Jewish apocalyptic future, and the Greek non-physical 
future life, in his pronouncement that on Judgment Day 
those who are then alive in the flesh will be ‘‘changed’’ 
(I Cor. xv, 51) (without going through the experience of 
death) so that all future life shall be uniformly spiritual. 
We must not expect to find in Paul an exclusive devotion 
to either of these conceptions of the future. Both the 
Jewish earthly future and the Greek spiritual idea can be 
found side by side in his thought. 

In John, the Christian gospel has completed the transi- 
tion to the spiritual point of view. John believes that 
the blessing of eternal life is bestowed upon Christians in 
their days in the flesh, not conferred by a physical resur- 
rection at a future Day. But John never attacked the 
apocalyptic idea. Like Paul, he was ready to become all 


Ch. 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 199 


things to all men if he might by any legitimate means win 
them to Christ. So, he made good use of a liberating 
power which has freed many a slave of literalism in every 
age. He did not deny the apocalyptic view of the Judg- 
ment, but construed and interpreted it as spiritual imagery. 
It was an age of transition and his audiences contained 
both Greek- and Jewish-minded people. He made the Jew- 
ish apocalyptic view of the future a symbol of the Greek. 
He did his best not to cause ‘‘one of these disciples’’ to 
stumble. Yet he made very plain where he himself stood. 
This has been set forth at length in the comments on 
John v, 24-29. 

Verses 23, 24 contain the older view. ‘‘He shall rise 
again in the resurrection at the Last Day.’’ Facing it 
squarely in verse 25, is the newer view that ‘‘He who 
believes in me shall never die’’ (26. Cf., ‘‘would not have 
died,’’ 21 and 32). Goodspeed’s words in commenting on 
this passage (quoting Scott) are substantially as follows: 
‘Martha expresses (in 24) the faith of the early Church 
that dying believers shall rise again at the last day. Over 
against this, Jesus declares that the life he imparts is 
unaffected by physical death (26). ‘Those who believe 
in him have risen already; their death is only in seeming 
and they carry with them into the world beyond the same 
life on which they entered here’ (Scott). The ultimate 
resurrection ‘is not the commencement but simply the 
manifestation of the new life’ (Scott). This departure 
from the old apocalyptic conception of the resurrection 
(as in store for us men at some indefinite future date) is 
an outstanding feature of the recasting of early Christian 
belief which is in process in the gospel of John.’’ 

‘“Jesus wept’’ (85). The older view explained these 
words as expressive of simple sorrow at the family tragedy. 
Of modern commentators some emphasize the fact ‘‘that 
even here Jesus stands apart from and above human 
grief,’’ ‘‘a divine being who. . . contemplates the earthly 
tragedy,’’ while others explain that he is weeping over the 


200 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


lack of faith on the part of the ‘‘Jews’’ (83). But he 
who sits down with the rest of the congregation in the 
Christian church at Ephesus will soon be sensible in that 
Gnostic atmosphere that one of John’s chief concerns here 
is to accent the human side of Jesus. So he takes pains to 
let them know that heavenly Lord whom they were wor- 
shiping has the compassionate heart of a sorrowing friend. 

There is difference of opinion as to John’s objective 
here. Paul addressed an audience accustomed to the point 
of view of Mark’s gospel and made it his purpose to glorify 
Jesus as a supernatural being at the right hand of God. 
Was that John’s object? Or was John addressing an 
audience accustomed to the Pauline teaching developed by 
years of contact in a Gnostic atmosphere with mystery 
religions; and did he, therefore, emphasize the historical 
origins of the Christian religion and magnify the richness 
of humanity in Jesus of Nazareth, in order to establish 
a personal loyalty to Jesus which would serve as a counter- 
balance for their mystic experiences? In this latter case 
John’s purpose in drawing attention to the fact that Jesus 
wept was to impress upon his listeners that so far from 
being coldly and distantly superhuman no Ephesian was 
too obscure for his personal loss or tragedy to bring sorrow 
to that sympathizing Friend. 

In verse 37, the Greek idea recurs that more light and 
fuller is the way of salvation. If Jesus is the Logos-Light 
of the world (Cf., xi, 9, 10), according to the Greek thought 
of the day, he must be the source of life and giver of that 
higher divine ‘‘fullness’’ of life which comes from the 
light of knowledge. ‘‘This man who opened the eyes of 
the blind man’’ (37) would be able to replenish, for Laz- 
arus, his ebbing store of the light of life and thus save 
him from the darkness of death. 

John’s insistence that no Christian ever dies is repeated 
again and again. Here is no teaching that Jesus will call 
men from their graves in the great resurrection, but that 
Jesus is the bearer to men of a kind of life that never gives 


Ch. 11, 1-52 DEATH AND LIFE 201 


in to but always conquers death. Acquaintance with the 
mystery religions and with the contrast between Jewish 
apocalyptic and Greek Stoicism points indisputably to this 
conclusion. 

In verses 47-53 John turns from the death of Lazarus 
and brings his hearers face to face with the death of Jesus. 
From this point on, in the Gospel, all that is said and 
done sustains an intimate relation with the death of Jesus. 
Possibly the author was swayed by its happy ending in 
making the story of Lazarus the vestibule to his treatment 
of the passion and death of Jesus. Uttered as a pretext 
by the high priest, John interprets the plea for Jesus’ death, 
and his ‘‘not for that nation only’’ (52) becomes the 
forerunner of the later, ‘‘If I am lifted up I will draw 
all men to me’’ (xii, 32). 

Tennyson in his well-known lines upon the story of 
Lazarus addresses himself to the critic and begs him not 
to mar its beauty as a picture to which is linked a ‘‘truth 
divine.’’ 


O thou that after toil and storm 
Mayst seem to have reach’d a purer air, 
Whose faith has centre everywhere 

Nor cares to fix itself to form, 


Leave thou thy sister, when she prays, 
Her early Heaven, her happy views; 
Nor thou with shadow’d hint confuse 

A life that leads melodious days. 


Her faith thro’ form is pure as thine, 
Her hands are quicker unto good; 
O, sacred be the flesh and blood 

To which she links a truth divine! 


See thou, that countest reason ripe 
In holding by the law within, 
Thou fail not in a world of sin, 

And ey’n for want of such a type? 


?Tennyson, In Memoriam, xxxiii. 


202 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Historical study bears Tennyson out in his plea that 
the story of Lazarus is a ‘‘form’’ by which simple faith 
lays firm hold of a vital truth. We can all agree that the 
purpose of the story is to show that Jesus is the bearer 
to men of a life that never gives in to death, and in par- 
ticular to show that the risen life which was formerly 
expected as a blessing of the Messianic Age may be realized 
immediately in the present through the power of Jesus, 
even as Martha’s hope that he ‘‘will rise’’ in the resur- 
rection changed at the behest of Jesus from a distant hope 
into an immediate joy. 


CHAPTER XIV 


THE ANOINTING AND THE FOOT WASHING 
JOHN XII AND XIIt 


xii, 1. Six days before the Passover Jesus came to 
Bethany. 2. So they gave a dinner for him there: and 
Martha did the serving; and Lazarus was one of those 
who reclined at the table with him. 38. And Mary took 
a pound of perfumed ointment of pure nard, very 
precious, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and then wiped 
his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the 
fragrance of the perfume. 4. Judas Iscariot, the dis- 
ciple who was going to betray him, says, 5. Why was 
not this perfume sold for fifty dollars, and given to the 
poor? 7. Jesus said, Let her alone; let her keep it for 
the day of my preparation for burial. 8. The poor you 
have always with you; but me you have not always. 


The character of the Gospel gradually changes in the 
later chapters, which differ considerably from the earlier. 
The topical series of talks that form the body of the book, 
which began with those on marriage and birth, and cover 
the range of daily life as represented by water, illness, 
food, light, has ended with a sermon on death. The next 
two chapters, xii and xili, however, contain further ex- 
amples of John’s ability to insert religious symbolism into 
an event of the ministry of Jesus. The narrative of the 
anointing of Jesus even in the Gospel of Mark has its 
peculiar significance beyond the face value of the incident. 
The washing of the disciples’ feet is also given as an 

203 


204 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


‘fexample’’ (xiii, 15) of a principle which they are thus 
enjoined to adopt and practice among themselves. 

Several reasons led John to include the anointing. In 
the first place, the anointing was a symbolic act over and 
above the intention of its doer. It was not merely an 
expression of devotion, for her act turned out even better 
than she intended. ‘‘She has anointed my body before- 
hand for the burying’’ (Mar. xiv, 8; Cf., John xii, 7). 
In the second place, the words of Jesus, ‘‘Me you have 
not always,’’ fit in perfectly with his instinct that the 
path of approach to the passion and death of Jesus should 
be a solemnly appropriate one. In the third place, it is 
easy to believe that John was eager to have his small 
personal share in the fulfillment of the prophecy of Jesus 
that ‘‘Wherever the gospel shall be preached throughout 
the whole world, that which this woman has done shall be 
spoken of.’’ (See comments on xviii, 9.) Incidentally 
this is one more confirmation of the position that the con- 
tents of John’s Gospel were ‘‘preached’’ and that the 
Gospel is a collection of spiritual lessons that he drew 
from the stores of memorabilia of Jesus known to him. 

The story of the anointing furnishes a most intricate 
problem for those who are interested in reconciling the 
differences in the four gospels. There are four stories of 
anointing, one in each of the four gospels. The narratives 
in Mark xiv and Matthew xxvi are practically identical. 
Matthew has taken over Mark’s wording; and the two may 
be considered as one. The anointing according to Mark 
and Matthew both is an anointing of Jesus’ head. In 
Luke vii, it is his feet which are anointed; likewise in John 
xil. This might lead to the inference that John’s account 
is more closely related to the Lukan than to the Markan. 
But such is not the case. The differences between John and 
Luke are so fundamental and extensive as to show that 
John made little or no use of the Lukan account. In 
Luke the woman is a sinner; in John’s Gospel she is Mary, 
sister of Martha. In Luke the cost of the ointment is not 


Ch. 12, 1-8 THE ANOINTING 205 


mentioned and plays no part in the story; in John it is 
central. 

On the other hand, comparison shows that John’s nar- 
rative follows closely the Mark-Matthew one. In both the 
supper is in Bethany. In both the cost is ‘‘fifty dollars.”’ 
In both objection is raised on the score of the cost; and 
in both the ‘‘poor’’ are mentioned. Likewise in both the 
anointing is given a reference by anticipation to the death 
and burial of Jesus. John’s story coincides with Mark’s 
even to the use of such a very peculiar expression as ‘‘pure 
nard’’ (John xii, 3; Mar. xiv, 3). 

Yet John declares that the feet were anointed. Older 
commentators decided that the woman anointed both head 
and feet on the same occasion. Godet says: ‘‘After the 
anointing in the ordinary form, that of the head, this bath- 
ing of the feet with perfume began.’’ Even Westcott 
implies the same idea when he says: ‘‘The Synoptists 
mention only the pouring on the head.’’ Study of New 
Testament times and in particular of the Gospel of John 
has now reached a point where the explanation seems prob- 
able that an Oriental scene given correctly in Mark has 
been translated into its Western equivalent for the benefit 
of its Ephesian audience in the Fourth Gospel. Any one 
who has visited Palestine knows that people there eat at a 
table which is raised about one foot from the floor, and 
are seated upon rugs with their feet underneath them. 
The same practice approximately was the custom of the 
ancient Jews. During supper it would be practically im- 
possible to anoint or even to touch any diner’s feet. On 
the other hand, the Greek and Roman custom at a banquet 
was to recline at full length on the left elbow with the 
feet of each banqueter spread out behind the back of 
the one reclining next. Under these circumstances, no 
woman would try to reach the head of one reclining at the 
table; but his feet could be easily bathed or anointed 
without attracting any general notice. 

Anointing of the head was the immemorial custom among 


206 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the Jews (Cf., Ps. xxiii), while anointing of the feet was 
similarly familiar among the Greeks.’ 

Older commentators of Luke sought to prove that the 
custom of reclining had found its way into Jerusalem, and 
that the supper attended by Jesus might have been held 
in the Western style (Luke vii). This is not at all im- 
possible (Cf., Amos vi, 4; Ezek. xxiii, 41). It does not 
help us, however, to understand why John’s account here 
follows Mark’s and Matthew’s so closely as to clearly 
indicate the same written source, yet makes this one 
change. 

Even where literary dependence seems plainest as here 
we must beware of treating John’s account as if it had 
been compiled in a library. It is rather one of many ver- 
sions of the same story in oral circulation among the people. 
Our gospels are not the sources of Christian tradition, 
but reflect the form which that tradition had taken at the 
time in the locality in which a particular gospel was given 
a fixed written dress. Early Christianity was a living 
organism, growing by adapting itself to its new environ- 
ment among the peoples. When Luther translated the 
Bible into the vernacular, he gave back, as Deissmann 
says, to the German people that which in origin and char- 
acter belonged to common people.” 

According to his custom, John may have also preferred 
the story as given in Mark for its richer allusions. The 
hearer’s heart is sympathetically ‘‘filled with the fra- 
grance’’ of the beautiful deed. The well-known Mary per- 
forms the act. It is Judas who mars the occasion with his 
objection. Mary stands for utter, unquestioning, personal 
devotion in all the gospel accounts (Cf., Luk. x, 39, 42). 
The very name of Judas starts in the mind thoughts of 
Jesus’ betrayal and death. In the shadow of the cross, 
in unconscious rebuke of his unfaithfulness personified, 
she gives her most precious possession free-heartedly. She 

1 Aristophanes, Wasps, 607. 

? Deissmann, II, 4. 


Ch. 12, 20-32 THE GRAIN OF WHEAT 207 


could not save him from death, but she did what she could; 
and Jesus gave to her act a significance far beyond her 
fondest dreams. 


THE GRAIN OF WHEAT AND THE HARVEST 
JOHN XI, 20-32 


xii, 20. There were some Greeks among those who 
went up to the festival; 21. and they came to Philip and 
said, We want to see Jesus. 22. Philip comes and tells 
Andrew: Andrew comes, and Philip, and they tell Jesus. 
23. Jesus answers them with the words, The hour has 
come for the Son of Man to be glorified. 24. I tell you, 
Unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, 
it remains a solitary grain; but if it dies it brings a 
harvest. 25. He who loves his own life loses it; and 
he who hates his life in the world will preserve it for 
the Life eternal. 27. My soul is troubled. What shall 
I say? Father, save me from this hour! Yet it was 
for this very purpose that I came to this hour. 32. If 
I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men 
toward myself. 


After the anointing with its foretokening of Jesus’ death, 
John introduces a scene in which three fundamental teach- 
ings concerning his death are combined. The Greeks (20) 
are but a few of many who must have been present in 
Jerusalem. Yet these few inquiring Greeks proved to be 
the first of great hosts of succeeding Greek inquirers 
throughout the Empire. Right in Ephesus, at the time this 
Gospel acquired written form, Greeks were coming to this 
or that Christian disciple (Cf., Philip in verse 21) to say 
that they would like to know more about Jesus (21). And 
the death on the cross made the strongest first bad im- 
pression of Jesus upon them and often was the last barrier 
to fall between them and full surrender to him.”’ 

John never gives any theological view, on the one hand, 
of the atonement, nor on the other hand does he defend 


208 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


it in a merely negative way as does the Book of Acts 
on the ground that the Old Testament prophesied that 
he must suffer. For other men, death is an act of resig- 
nation that comes hard to many, and easy to a few. John 
always presents the death in positive fashion. His thought 
is that the death of Jesus was not a piece of resignation, 
but an act of supreme self-dedication, his greatest achieve- 
ment and the climax of his life. Furthermore, he always 
presents the death in terms to show that Jesus hoped and 
expected that this supreme act of self-assertion would con- 
tribute the final element that would render his appeal to 
men irresistible. The serpent in the wilderness saving 
lives and uplifted for all to see and be saved (ili, 14), the 
shepherd letting his life go and saving the lives of his 
sheep (x, 15), are examples of John’s point of view. Sim- 
ilarly, here the grain of wheat and the first harvest of 
thirty, sixty and an hundredfold (Mar. iv, 8) and the 
second harvest of thirty times thirty, sixty times sixty 
and one hundred times one hundred, and so on in geometri- 
cal progression again pictures the endless chain of power 
to reproduce itself, which is one of the most outstanding 
properties of life. 

This basic point of view of his is associated by John 
with two other thoughts concerning Jesus’ death. One 
of these is the well-known ‘‘doubly attested’’ saying of 
Jesus occurring, indeed, five times in Matthew, Mark and 
Luke, ‘‘He who loses his life shall find it.’?’ In his own 
death Jesus was carrying out his own teaching in this 
regard. In verse 25 it is the man who is not over-anxious 
about that side of his life to which this world’s goods 
minister who finds the higher spiritual life, the Life eternal. 
Two words are used for ‘‘life’’ here and they are quite 
distinct and different in meaning. In the translation above, 
Life of the higher character is capitalized but life of the 
lower sort is not. An approximately exact, literal trans- 
lation preserving this difference in the original words 
would read, ‘‘He who loves himself loses his soul, while 


Ch. 18, 4-17 WASHING DISCIPLES’ FEET 209 


he who spurns the wordly way of existence will preserve 
his soul for the Life eternal.’’ 

Finally the likening of his death to the endless repro- 
ducing power of the buried grain of wheat enables John 
to recur to a favorite thought with him that the cross 
raised Jesus to such a height that all the world might 
‘‘see’’ him. Seeing him there, it would learn to recognize 
him without fail as the bearer of Eternal life. ‘‘If I am 
lifted up from the earth I will draw all men toward 
myself’’ (32). This explains the use of the word ‘‘see’’ 
in verse 21. 

That is the threefold content in the account of the 
visit of the Greeks to see Jesus; first, the endless power 
of reproducing life of the same species wrapped up in 
the buried grain of wheat; second, the word of Jesus that 
he who lets his life go shall find that he has not lost it; 
and third, the cross an exaltation which raised Jesus to a 
height where all the world is able to get a look at him 
and is able to understand the language of his hanging 
there, 2.e., that in his death he stands revealed as the pos- 
sessor of Eternal life and, therefore, the bearer of endless 
power to reproduce life of the same species in as many as 
see and believe on him. 


WASHING THE DISCIPLES’ FEET 
JOHN xin, 4-17 


xiii, 4. Jesus rises from supper and removes his outer 
garments; and he takes a towel and ties it around his 
waist. 5. Then he pours water into the basin, and he 
began to wash the disciples’ feet. 8. Peter says to him, 
You shall never wash my feet. Jesus answered, Unless 
I wash you, you have no share with me. 9. Peter says 
to him, Then, not my feet only, but also my hands and 
my face. 10. Jesus says to him, Any one who has bathed 
has only to wash his feet to be entirely clean; and you 
have already bathed. 

12. When he had washed their feet and returned to 


210 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


supper, he said, Do you understand what I have been 
doing? 13. You call me Teacher and Master. 14. If 
I then have washed your feet you also ought to wash 
each other’s feet. 15. For I have given you an ex- 
ample, that you should do as I have done to you. 16. A 
servant is not greater than his master; nor an apostle 
greater than the one who has sent him. 17. If you 
understand these things, blessed are you if you do them. 


The washing of the disciples’ feet is pure symbol—the 
most striking instance, perhaps, in the entire Gospel. Be- 
sides, therefore, its great religious value in itself, it con- 
tributes a strong element of confirmation to other testi- 
mony that symbol is prominent throughout. 

Any and every customary washing of the feet would 
have taken place before the meal. In Luke’s account of 
the anointing of Jesus’ feet, Jesus turns to his host and 
says, ‘‘I entered into your house, you gave me no water 
for my feet’’ (Luk. vii, 44), as a reminder of a failure 
in hospitality on his part. In Jesus’ time, as today in 
those parts of the world, the sandals worn for shoes were 
removed or changed upon entering the house. Such san- 
dals were quite insufficient to keep the dust of the dirt 
roads from soiling the feet; and washing of the feet after 
a journey and before eating was as common as washing 
of the hands in America. 

The supper mentioned is not the Passover supper, for 
the meal here described is said to have occurred on the 
day ‘‘before the feast’’ (xiii, 1). The relation of this 
supper to the Passover and the difference, also, in chron- 
ology between Mark and John will be discussed in the 
comments on John xviii. It is clear, however, without 
any discussion, that the foot-washing occurred on the last 
night; and, therefore, at Jesus’ last supper. Just as in 
i, 19-34, John assumes and does not state that Jesus was 
baptized, so here he assumes and makes no direct statement 
that Jesus ate the last supper with the disciples. All his 


Ch. 138, 4-17 WASHING DISCIPLES’ FEET 211 


references to the inauguration of the Lord’s Supper as a 
sacrament and all his words regarding the Eucharist are 
contained in the account of the feeding of the multitude 
in vi, 1-65. 

Rising from supper Jesus takes a towel, pours water 
into a basin, and began to wash the feet of the disciples. 
When he gets to him, Simon Peter objects. Jesus an- 
swered, Unless I wash you, you have no share with me. 
Plainly this ceremonial is heavy with a significance that 
will be searched for in vain in the physical sphere. 

The time of Jesus’ passing is fast approaching. How 
are they going to get along together under the new con- 
ditions? What farewell counsel can he give them that 
will strengthen them where they are weak, perhaps where 
they are weakest? Thoughts of this kind must have been 
running through the mind of Jesus as that last supper 
began. 

United only would they be able to stand; divided they 
would surely fall. Teamwork together is the only way 
that they can pull through the persecution that aw.its them. 

Jesus has himself gained first place by taking last. Not 
by chance. That is one of the first and foremost principles 
of his gospel. They call him Teacher, truly, for he has 
sat at their feet and put far more time and thought into 
his study of them and their ways than all of them put 
together have wrestled in study to become letter perfect 
in his gospel. They call him Master, truly, for they have 
been his masters and their dead conservatism has forced 
him to slave in their service, if haply he might open a slit 
for each of them through which they could look out and 
see correctly the change wrought in life by this reversal 
of the everyday standards used by them to measure its 
good and harm. 

‘“‘Do you understand what he has done?’’ John asks 
his hearers in Ephesus. A careful study of the signifi- 
eance for John of this act throws light on the character 
of his whole view of Jesus’ ministry. In reality the expla- 


212 Tuer GOSPEL OF JOHN 


nation takes the form and is as much pure symbol as the 
act itself. Verse 15 contains that explanation: He has 
given them an example that they also should do as he has 
done. This explanation must not be taken literally. To be 
sure the act itself has been literally copied by some branches 
of the Christian church. The Greek Catholic Church still 
does so at Easter time in Jerusalem. Upon a raised plat- 
form the patriarch before a multitude of people bathes 
the feet of his ecclesiastical confreres. It cannot be denied 
that it forms one of the most impressive scenes of the 
whole Easter festival. Many spectators unthinkingly as- 
sume this rendering of literal obedience to Jesus’ command 
is the sole purpose of this modern ceremony. It would be 
more generous to the Greek Catholic Church to say that 
in this instance the literal obedience is secondary and sub- 
ordinate to the wish to keep alive in the hearts of its 
people this principle of Jesus’ teaching by this annual 
repetition of the act that gave it birth. 

However that be, neither Jesus nor John had in mind 
that Christians would ever ‘‘wash one another’s feet’? 
and call that following the example set by Jesus on this 
occasion. But John gives no other explanation, it may 
be replied. He trusts his readers to use their Christian 
intuition and to understand that the explanation itself is 
as much pure symbol as the act explained. ‘‘You ought 
to wash one another’s feet’’ does but turn prose into 
poetry, the prose principle being that a Christian obtains 
first place by taking last and doing what his necessities 
require, however humble and menial, for the benefit of a 
neighbor or brother. 


THE BELOVED DISCIPLE 
JOHN XIII, 23-26 


xiii, 23. There was at the table reclining in Jesus’ 
bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24. Simon 
Peter beckons to him, and says to him, Tell us who it is 
of whom he speaks. 25. He leaned back, as he was, on 


Ch. 18, 23-26 THE BELOVED DISCIPLE 213 


Jesus’ breast and says to him, Master, who is it? 26. 
Jesus answers, It is the one for whom I dip a piece 
of bread and give it to him. 


‘*Reclining in Jesus’ bosom’’ (23) indicates simply that 
the disciple mentioned occupied the place next below Jesus, 
or, as we would say, at Jesus’ right. Their manner of 
sitting or reclining at table has been described in our 
comments on the anointing, xii, 1-8. ‘‘Leaned back, as he 
was, on Jesus’ breast’’ (25) tells us that at the moment 
in question the disciple moved his head and shoulders back- 
ward so that his head rested on Jesus’ chest and his mouth 
was close to Jesus’ ear. 

Who was the disciple ‘‘whom Jesus loved’’? The ques- 
tion has been discussed at length in a previous chapter on 
authorship. As noted there, part of the present passage 
is quoted in the appendix of the Gospel (xxi, 7, 20) where 
the statement is made that this is the one who ‘‘wrote’’ 
the Gospel. Outside of his appearance there we meet this 
unnamed character only three times (xili, 23; xix, 26; 
xx, 2). Yet in this picture he is closer to the heart of 
Jesus than Simon Peter himself. Bacon in his ‘‘Fourth 
Gospel in Research and Debate’’ points out that the other 
three gospels present the one, 7.e. ‘‘synoptic,’’ view of 
Jesus based upon the Gospel of Mark; that the Gospel of 
Mark is the written monument, containing the substance 
of Peter’s preaching; that the description of the beloved 
one who has closer communion with Jesus than Peter tallies 
closely with that of the disciple author who knows Jesus 
in the way that this Fourth Gospel knows him. In other 
words, Bacon’s interpretation of verses 23-26 is that they 
voice a claim of superiority for the Fourth Gospel over 
the other three, in keeping with the first place in his 
confidence over the other disciples given by Jesus to its 
author. 

The Beloved Disciple in turn becomes for Bacon the 
first of a long line of Christian disciples who recognize 


214 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the superficial secondary character of the Markan or Petrine 
Gospel, as they come closer to the heart of Jesus with this 
Fourth Gospel and commune with Jesus in mystic intimacy, 
understand the inner meaning of his words and learn his 
secret thoughts. He has stated this in much better lan- 
guage and at far greater length than can be done here.’ 

That verses 23-26 do imply that the Fourth Gospel comes 
closer to the heart of Jesus in the estimation of its Ephe- 
sian hearers, who gave it written form to preserve it, than 
the Gospel of Mark and the other two, seems to be a con- 
clusion hard to escape. But Bacon is not ready to admit 
that this Fourth Gospel can be the work of an actual com- 
panion of Jesus in the days of his flesh. His conclusion, 
therefore, is that the author speaks here in a parable and 
the ‘‘Beloved Disciple’’ pictured in mystic communion and 
conversation with Jesus is a creation of his own mind and 
not one of the flesh-and-blood persons present at the supper. 
On the other hand, Burkitt, Delff, Deissmann, Garvie, 
Burney and those others mentioned in our chapter on the 
Authorship, hold that the Beloved Disciple was not this 
literary fiction, but an actual historical person. Our own 
reasons for believing that the Gospel may have been written 
by this historical Beloved Disciple have been given in the 
earlier chapter. 

3See Bacon, pp. 210-331. 


CHAPTER XV 


JESUS’ RELATION TO HIS DISCIPLES 
JOHN XIV TO XVII 


xiv, 1. Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe 
in God, and believe in me. 2. In my Father’s house 
are many abiding-places; I am going away to prepare 
a place for you. 3. And if I go and prepare a place 
for you I will come back again and take you to be with 
me; so that you may be where I am. 4. And you know 
the way to the abode where I am going. 5. Thomas says 
to him, Master, we do not know where you are going; 
how can we know the way? 6. Jesus says to him, I am 
the way, and the truth, and the life: no one comes to the 
Father except through me. 9. He who has seen me has 
seen the Father. 10. I live in the Father, and the Father 
in me. The words which I speak to you I speak not 
from myself: but the Father abiding in me is doing 
his own works. 12. He who believes in me will himself 
do the works that I am doing; and still greater works 
than these will he do. 13. And whatever you shall ask 
in my name, I will do. 16. And I will ask the Father, 
and he will give you a further Helper, even the Spirit: 
which the world cannot receive; for the world does not 
recognize it or know it. 18. I will not leave you friend- 
less or alone; I will come to you. 19. In a little while 
the world will see me no more, but you will see me. 20. 
In that day you will know that I am in the Father, and 
you in me, and I in you. 21. He who loves me will be 
loved by my Father, and I will love him, and will reveal 
myself to him. 22. Judas, not Iscariot, says to him, 
You will reveal yourself to us and not to the world? 

215 


216 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN. 


23. Jesus answered, Any one who loves me, will keep 
my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come 
to him and make our abode with him. 

26. The Helper, that is the Holy Spirit, which the 
Father will send in my name, will teach you all things, 
and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. 
27. Peace be with you; my peace I give to you: not as 
the world gives do I give you. Do not let your hearts 
be troubled. 28. You heard me say, I go away, and I 
return to you. 


In chapters xiv to xvii, the close and vital relations exist- 
ing between Christians and the risen Jesus and through 
him with God supply the subject matter. The whole sec- 
tion has been characterized as a Christological essay. But 
it does not appear to have been composed as a unit. It is 
rather a collection made up of several parts. The last 
verse of chapter xiv, ‘‘ Arise, let us go hence,’’ distinctly 
indicates the end of one section. Similarly we have in 
xvil, 1, an introduction to another. 

Chapter xiv takes the answer of the author of the Fourth 
Gospel to the question, ‘‘ Will Christ come again?’’ and, 
according to his common practice, pictures Jesus talking 
for Ephesus. The problem of the Second Coming grew 
more and more acute during the progress of the first cen- 
tury. The veteran leader of Ephesus showed great tact 
in handling other solutions but left his hearers in no doubt 
as to his own. This chapter contains perhaps the highest 
and most spiritual answer which any early Christian leader 
ever gave to the ever-recurring question of the return of 
Jesus. 

The well-understood significance of the ‘‘I’’ style of the 
Gospel, used throughout this chapter, has been explained 
at length in the comments on chapter x. Preparatory 
work for its understanding occurs, also, in the comments 
on v, 19-29, and in the chapter, The Popular Quality of 
the Gospel. The ‘‘I’’ style is intended by its user to con- 


Oh. 14, 1-28 RELATION TO His DISCIPLES 217 


vey the utter sincerity of his conviction that the reading 
of the chapter in the life of Jesus thus presented has Jesus 
in person behind it. To reproduce the impression which 
it made at the time on its original hearers, it is best to 
observe four distinct rules in this and the following chap- 
ters. First, bear constantly in mind that this Gospel is 
based on popular oral testimony, that this material was 
spoken many times before publication. To illustrate: Orig- 
inally, ‘‘Let not your heart be troubled’’ was no doubt the 
intimate pastoral word of the Ephesian veteran Christian 
to particular people or a particular group who were in 
great distress of mind. 

Secondly, further help in recovering the original im- 
pression may be obtained by repeating the verses with the 
substitution of the third person for the first. This may 
be said, in a sense, to effect a translation of the ‘‘I’’ style 
into our usual modern way of stating a creed or confes- 
sion. 

1. Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, 
and believe in Jesus also. 2. In the Father’s house are 
many mansions. Jesus went to prepare a place for you. 
3. He promised to return and to take you to himself. 
6. Jesus is the way, and the truth, and the life. 9. He 
who has known Jesus has known the Father. 10. He lived 
in the Father, and the Father was in him. The words that 
he spoke, he spoke not of himself, but the Father abiding in 
him was doing his own work. 12. He who believes in Jesus 
will do the works that Jesus did; and still greater works 
he will achieve. 16. And Jesus has given us a Helper, 
17. even the Spirit. 18. Jesus does not leave us alone: he 
comes to us. 20. In the day that he comes we know that he 
is in the Father, and we in him, and hein us. 23. If any 
one loves Jesus, he will keep Jesus’ commandments: and 
the Father God will love him. 27. Jesus speaks to us 
and says: Peace be with you. His own peace he gives 
to us, not as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be 
troubled. 


218 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


In the third place, the prayer-note which is one of the 
overtones in a ereedal confession can be captured by turn- 
ing the same passage into the second person. 1. Our hearts 
shall not be troubled. 2. In the Father’s house are many 
mansions. Thou, Jesus, hast gone to prepare a place for 
us. 38. Thou hast promised to come again to take us to 
thyself. 6. Thou art the way and the truth and the life. 
9. He that hath known thee hath known the Father. 10. 
Thou wast in the Father, and the Father in thee. The 
words that thou didst say thou didst not speak of thyself, 
but the Father abiding in thee did perform through thee 
his works. 12. He who believeth in thee will do thy works; 
and greater works will he achieve. 16. And thou hast 
given us a Helper, 17. even the Spirit. 18. Thou hast not 
left us desolate; thou hast come to us. 20. In the hour 
thou hast come we have known that thou wast in the Father 
and we in thee and thou in us. 23. If a man loves thee 
he will keep thy commandments; and thy Father will love 
him. 27. Peace thou givest to us; thy peace thou givest. 
Our hearts shall not be troubled. 

In the fourth place, let the whole chapter be read in the 
first person as John has written it, holding before the mind 
its oral first use, its content as a creed, and its beauty 
as a prayer. Remember Paul’s words, ‘‘Christ liveth in 
me,’’ and Jesus’ words in Luke xii, 12, ‘‘The Holy Spirit 
will teach you what you ought to say.’’ Put yourself in 
John’s place with living men before you looking up to you 
for an answer and thus as an ‘‘ambassador’’ speaking for 
Jesus feel that you have Jesus in person behind you in 
giving this answer. 

As stated above, the underlying subject dealt with is 
the Second Coming. Verse 3 makes the first specific allu- 
sion to the return of Jesus. In verse 18 Jesus promises, 
‘“T will not leave you friendless and alone: I will come to 
you.’’ Verse 20 speaks of ‘‘that Day.’’ Again in verse 
28 Jesus says, ‘‘I go away, and I come to you.’’ The 
position taken and unfolded at length in the chapter ig 


Ch. 14, 1-28 RELATION TO His DISCIPLES 219 


that the promise of the Second Coming is no longer promise, 
but fulfillment for every believer who has opened his heart 
that Jesus might dwell there, along with the gift of Eternal 
life that he comes bearing with him. 

*‘In my Father’s house are many mansions’’ (2). The 
words call up Paul’s hope expressed in II Cor. v, 1, ‘‘If 
the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have 
a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal 
in the heavens.’’ <As stated before, Paul still clung, how- 
ever, to the Jewish idea of a single literal Coming or 
Parousia, with a great assize of the living and dead, but 
he also betrayed the fact that he was influenced at times 
as here by the Greek conception that at death the souls 
of virtuous men are received back into the bosom of God. 
We find the Greek point of view preponderates in the 
Fourth Gospel. ‘‘Mansions’’ in the ‘‘Father’s house’’ 
convey a popular, domestic, soul-warming picture of the 
truth that at death the soul goes home. After years of 
wandering and tenting in the flesh, as it were, it goes home 
to the Father’s house, where preparation has been made 
for a great welcome into a permanent abiding place. Jesus 
preceded them to prepare a place for each of his friends. 

Acceptance of this point of view would tend to rob spec- 
ulation concerning a single Second Coming, with a great 
assize of the living and dead, of its chief attractions. The 
Jewish hope differed. The Jews clung to their hope for 
a day of general resurrection because they believed their 
dead were in Sheol. Their road up to the presence of 
God must include a return to earth in a literal resurrec- 
tion. In exchange for that hope, good and comforting 
as it is, John is confident that Jesus has shown him a better 
hope still. That there may be no misunderstanding of 
his meaning he uses the exact words of the older hope in 
verse 3, ‘‘I go. . . and I come again.’’ Then he proceeds 
to break his news of the new and unexpected way to them 
that Jesus will ‘‘come again.’’ This is the only occur- 
rence in this Gospel, it may be worth noting, of the ex- 


220 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


pression that Jesus will come ‘‘again’’; elsewhere it is 
simply ‘‘go’’ and ‘‘come.’’ This holds true even in verse 
28, where for the sake of smoothness we have translated 
SePELUTTi. 

The reference to ‘‘going’’ and ‘‘coming’’ introduces the 
fioure of the ‘‘way.’’ The way Jesus will go and come 
(8-4) leads to the thought of the way which Christians 
must go (6). The change from letter to symbol is led up 
to, as usual in this Gospel, by a puzzled question, ‘‘We do 
not know where you are going; how can we know the 
way?’’ (5). Thus do we make the acquaintance of the 
designation of Christianity as ‘‘the Way,’’ a name very 
widely used in the first century. One of the most inter- 
esting early Christian documents, the Didache or ‘‘Teach- 
ing of the Twelve Apostles,’’ is a description of the two 
‘“Ways,’’ the way of life and the way of death. The Book 
of Acts uses the same expression, ‘‘any that were of the 
Way’’ (ix, 2). Once again the Fourth Gospel evidences 
its intensely practical character by putting its foot down 
on all human speculation as idle, concerning whither Jesus 
himself is going and the way. In the ease of those who 
coveted a knowledge of how to work the works that Jesus 
did, it rather tartly told them that the miracle for them 
to perform was the miracle of believing in Jesus. Sim- 
ilarly here, in a like tart fashion, it tells its readers to 
curb their curiosity in regard to whither Jesus was going 
himself and the way and center their whole attention on 
learning the heavenly way, truth and life for them- 
selves from him for Jesus was that way, truth and life per- 
sonified. 

Verse 12, like the rest of the chapter, yields its largest 
meaning when read in the light of Ephesian Christianity 
as its context. ‘‘Greater works than these (of Galilee) shall 
he achieve’’ refers as elsewhere in the Gospel to the larger 
scale on which Christian activity did carry on in the Empire 
in the latter part of the first century, as that seed-sowing 
in Nazareth and Jerusalem began to return increasing 


Ch. 14, 1-28 RELATION TO His DISCIPLES 221 


yields. Jesus gave sight in Galilee to blind men here and 
there. Through his ambassadors in Ephesus he was giving 
sight to the blind in great numbers. Jesus fed a multitude 
in Galilee on one or two occasions; but his followers as 
his almoners were feeding many multitudes with the bread 
of life in every land of the civilized world. 

The promise of Jesus to ‘‘come again’’ (3) and the dis- 
cussion of the ‘‘way’’ (6) leading to the assurance of 
the “‘greater works’’ (12) daily proven true in Ephesus, 
culminate in the coming of the Spirit (16,17). The Spirit 
supplies the missing element that makes the ‘‘greater 
works’’ possible. This bringing of the Helper is identified 
in verse 18, ‘‘I will not leave you alone; I will come to 
you”’ as that which brings him back again. The statement 
that the unconverted world ‘‘does not recognize or know 
the Spirit’’ confirms this interpretation of the Coming 
which is in line, also, with Jesus’ statement in Luke xvii, 
20, 21, ‘‘The Kingdom of God comes not with observation : 
neither shall they say, Lo, here! or, There! for lo, the 
Kingdom of God is within you.’’ 

The identification of the bringing of the Spirit as the 
great object and the sufficient explanation of his ‘‘ coming 
again’’ holds true in the following verses, 20-24. ‘‘In that 
Day’’ was the accepted expression to designate the Day 
of the Messianic Coming both in the Old Testament and 
in the New Testament. ‘‘Who may abide the day of his 
ecoming?’’ (Mal. ili, 2). ‘‘Many will say in that day’’ 
(Mat. vii, 22). ‘‘The day of the Lord is coming’’ (I Thess. 
v, 2). Here in John’s Gospel the ‘‘Day of the Messianic 
Coming’’ is interpreted as referring to the great day of 
the coming of the spiritual presence of Jesus into the 
heart of each new follower. Confidence that this is the true 
reading is intensified by the statement in verse 21 that 
Jesus ‘‘ will reveal’’ or ‘‘manifest’’ himself in special degree 
to the inner circle of those who keep his commandments 
and who love him and are loved by him. Again the device 
of a misunderstanding and ‘‘the question of information’’ 


222 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


so common in this Gospel meets us in verse 22. ‘‘You will 
manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?’’ The apoca- 
lyptie view was that the Messianic coming was to be a world 
event. Then advantage is taken of the opportunity to 
make a still more explicit statement in verse 23 that the 
Father ‘‘will come’’ with Jesus and they will make their 
‘‘abode’’ together with the true disciple. 

Again in verses 25 ff. we have this same point of view 
in regard to the Second Coming carried a step further. 
The ‘‘Helper’’ previously referred to is definitely stated 
to be the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit will ‘‘bring to 
remembrance’’ (26) that Jesus said ‘‘I go away, and I 
return’’ (28) and his very presence will be the absolutely 
satisfactory answer and put a stop once for all to all specu- 
lation over what he was referring to when he said ‘‘I go 
away and I return.”’ 

On the side of method, this was a feat of religious states- 
manship on John’s part. He made no direct attack upon 
those who took the apocalyptic prophecies literally. Yet 
he did not evade but answered clearly and definitely all 
who were asking the question, ‘‘Where is the promise of 
his coming?’’ (II Pet. i, 4). Jesus has already returned 
and is present spiritually in our midst, answered John, 
and put his answer to positive use in the enrichment of 
the religious consciousness of his hearers. He turned the 
appeal of apocalyptic poetry from an idle dream into a 
powerful agent in the promotion of the Christian cause. 
He startled his people then and he startles us today by 
his soul-stirring proclamation that the wonders of the great 
‘‘Day’’ are already taking place all over the world. 


THE VINE AND THE BRANCHES 
JOHN XV 
xv, 1. I am the true vine, and my Father is the care- 
taker. 2. Any branch that does not bear fruit he re- 
moves; and every branch that bears fruit he cleanses and 
prunes so that it may bear more fruit. 4. As a branch 


Ch. 15, 1-25 THE VINE AND BRANCHES 223 


eannot bear fruit by itself, unless it remains in union 
with the vine; so you cannot unless you remain in union 
with me. 5. I am the vine, you are the branches. Any 
one who abides in union with me, as I abide in union 
with him, bears good fruit. 6. If any one does not 
abide in me, he is thrown away like a branch, and withers 
up; and men gather such branches and throw them in 
the fire and burn them. 8. It is through your bearing 
of good fruit that my Father is honored. 

13. No man has greater love than this, that he will 
lay down his life for his friends. 15. I no longer call 
you servants, for a servant does not know what his 
master is doing: but I have now ealled you ‘‘friends’’; 
for I have made known to you everything that I have 
learned from my Father. 16. I chose you, and appointed 
you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will abide. 

18. If the world hates you, you know that it has hated 
me first. 20. A servant is not greater than his master. 
If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you. 
21. They will do all this to you because they do not know 
the one who sent me. 22. If I had not come and spoken 
to them they would not have been guilty of sin, but 
now they have no excuse for their sin. 23. He who 
hates me hates my Father also. 25. As written in their 
Law, They hated me without cause. 


As has been previously stated, the three fundamental 
words of this Gospel are Light, Life, and Belief in him. 
Jesus is the Light of the world who lights the way into 
Eternal life for all who make the great surrender and 
travel the path thus pointed out. The great surrender 
constitutes the one and only valid proof of Belief in him 
or Loyalty to him. Chapter ix presented and explained 
Jesus as the Light; chapter xi, Jesus as the Life; chapter 
Xv now presents and explains the Belief in Jesus or Loyalty 
by which the Disciple becomes a partaker of that Light and 
Life. 


224 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Loyalty, or ‘‘Belief,’’ or ‘‘Faith,’’ is more than the 
personal devotion of a subordinate to his Chief in this 
Gospel. In the synoptic gospels, as explained before, ‘‘to 
believe on’’ means to trust him, but in Paul it means that 
and in addition to enter into partnership with, to come 
into close personal mystical communion with. This vital 
contact is fundamental, also, for John. Hot water is hot 
water, but when the heat in hot water reaches the intensity 
of steam, the hot water acts so differently that it is really 
something else. So, for John consent that Jesus is right 
in his teaching is consent until it reaches a transition point 
of communion when consent and obedience act so differ- 
ently that they are really something else altogether. Again, 
communion with him is communion, but when the consent 
that gives him right of way in a disciple’s being reaches 
a still higher transition point and the two lives remain 
two lives but are indistinguishably one in quality, consent 
and communion act so differently that they are really 
names for something else and no longer do justice to the 
pitch of intimacy between the two lives that started as 
disciple and master, but have long since passed on out of 
that relationship. In the Fourth Gospel, John is putting 
on an advanced course in the Christian life. The earlier 
stages of consent and communion are assumed in the main 
and treated apparently as milk for babes. The meat for 
men that the Fourth Gospel provides is this recipe for 
the attainment of the goal where the two lives that started 
as disciple and Master remain two but are indistinguishably 
one in quality and have, therefore, outgrown the relation 
of Master and disciple. 

In reading chapter xv observe again the four rules 
given in the preceding chapter. First faney yourself a 
member of one of the Ephesian audiences who heard it 
delivered before it was prepared for publication. Second, 
read it aloud in the third person. Third, repeat it again 
and use ‘‘thou’’ and ‘‘thee.’’ Fourth, in the spirit of 
Jesus’ words in the last chapter, ‘‘I come unto you,’’ think 


Ch. 15, 1-25 THE VINE AND BRANCHES 225 


of Jesus as on a visit to Ephesus and, at John’s invitation, 
specially addressing this talk to the Christians of Ephesus. 

Jesus is the vine; we are the branches. He who keeps 
in vital touch with Jesus bears good fruit (5). If a dis- 
ciple lets his personal contact with Jesus be severed, he 
becomes like a detached and withered branch, the kind that 
are gathered and thrown in the fire and burned (6). It is 
only as good fruit is borne that the Father (as caretaker) 
is honored. 

The direct use of the figure of the vine ends with the 
tenth verse, but the same vein of thought runs on through 
the chapter, as is indicated by the double mention of 
*‘fruit’’ in verse 16. It is a quite different form of illus- 
tration from the parable form used in the synoptie gospels. 
Here every item has its symbolism. This is the best ex- 
ample of allegory in the New Testament. The attempt 
might be made to relate this allegory to sayings of Jesus 
in regard to wine and fruit in the other gospels. But it 
will be far more illuminating to examine it in the light 
of two of Paul’s favorite ways of speaking. 

Paul made use of such expressions as ‘‘Christ in me’’ 
Pde in. bin?’ (Gal. ii, 20% Rom: viii; 1; Col.:i,.27). 
Paul had many ways of speaking of this kind which were 
difficult for some of his followers to grasp. One of John’s 
great services to Christianity was his ability to state these 
more deeply mystical sentiments in simple concrete lan- 
guage. John was even more truly a popular preacher than 
was Paul. Any one can see the general point and re- 
member the picture of the vine, the branches and the fruit. 
Church windows are a witness to the wide popularity of 
this symbol. Yet, like other pictures in John’s Gospel, 
dig down and it will be found to contain an unmeasured 
depth of religious significance and appeal. Wherever the 
expressions ‘‘in me,’’ ‘‘in him,’’ ‘‘in the Father,’’ ‘‘in us,’’ 
‘in you’’ are found in Paul and John, referring them to 
this figure of the vine and the branches will be found to 
be the best way to understand them. Apply this, for ex- 


226 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


ample, to xiv, 20, ‘‘ You will know that I am in the Father 
as you in me.”’ 

The ‘‘fruits’’ of the Spirit is another favorite expression 
of Paul. Over and over again, as John repeats the word ~ 
‘*fruit,’’ his hearers must have thought of some such list 
as that of Gal. v, 22, ‘‘The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, 
peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, humility, 
self-control.’?’ To these, as John had often reminded his 
hearers must be added other fruits, such as feeding hungry 
souls, dispensing the water of life, giving light to the 
spiritually blind, and life to the dead and despairing. 

In verses 11-16 John still adheres to his subject, the 
loyalty of believers to Jesus in personal union with him. 
He drops the mask of the figurative and speaks openly 
of the bond existing between intimate ‘‘friends.’’ Here 
again is a word of undying significance, eternally fresh 
and valid. There are many good recent books on “ Friend- 
ship’’ and all the wealth of this literature can be drawn on 
by the Christian leader in depicting the relation of Chris- 
tians to Jesus. ‘‘No longer do I call you servants; for the 
servant does not know what his master is doing: but I 
have called you friends’’ (15). Verse 15 harks back for 
its full, imposing meaning to the supreme act of devotion 
between ‘‘friends’’ in verse 13. The emphasis upon 
knowledge, 7.e., sharing each other’s confidences, as the 
feature distinguishing friend and servant is in line with 
the attitude of John toward knowledge throughout his 
Gospel. It is through such sharing of his confidence that 
we come to ‘‘know’’ Jesus in a personal way. ‘‘No longer’’ 
reminds us that as recently as Paul, a disciple might refer 
to himself as a bond servant of Christ. But John ‘‘no 
longer’’ used this term, although Paul had done so in 
Ephesus and elsewhere. John emphasized the dignity and 
glory and emancipating power that were the accompani- 
ments of the knowledge obtained by sharing in the confi- 
dences of Jesus. (See comments on vili, 31-36.) 

While he is on the subject of friendship John improves 


Ch. 15, 1-25 THE VINE AND BRANCHES 227 


the opportunity to introduce an explanation of the death 
of Jesus from this new angle. John’s positive and power- 
ful interpretations of this event have been noted in the 
comments on viii, 20-25; x, 11; and xii, 20-32. Here is 
still another. The explanation why Jesus died is the sim- 
ple reason of friendship. ‘‘No man has greater love than 
this, that a man will lay down his life for his friends’”’ 
(13). Like his other explanations, this one is not in the 
nature of a theological exposition of Jesus’ death. 

The explanation of Jesus’ death as the laying down 
of life in behalf of his friends opens the way for a dis- 
cussion of persecution (xv, 18-xvi, 4). These talks were 
given either at times when persecution was imminent or 
at times when persecution was at work among them. What 
is the right attitude in which to meet and suffer perse- 
cution? If any are inclined to plead that persecution of 
them is unmerited by them let them remember that the 
world hated him before it hated them. Surely they do not 
elaim that they merit better treatment than he at the 
hands of the world’s hate. Again, if the ‘‘Master’’ divested 
himself of that name, and took up the name of Friend, 
their greatest and best, and as one friend for another 
died for them, what kind of friends would they show 
themselves to be when persecution calls upon them to lay 
down their lives for him, if they murmur first and complain 
and then refuse? 

Persecution is something distant and historical and 
unreal to us, but to John’s hearers in Ephesus the question 
how to meet it was, perhaps, chief among their pressing 
daily problems. And hundreds of the Christian rank and 
file threw their persecutors into a new, strange and unbear- 
able terror by the look of unearthly joy on their faces as 
they marched forth to meet the torment, torture and death 
prepared for them by the world’s hate. Elsewhere we are 
told that we ought not to find it hard to love God when 
he had loved us so adorably first. So these Christian mar- 
tyrs told the world that hated them that the reason they 


228 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


did not find it hard to die as one friend for another for 
Jesus was that he had died as one friend for another for 
them first. 


THE DEPARTURE AND THE RETURN OF JESUS 
JOHN XVI 


xvi, 2. They will put you out of their synagogues: 
in fact the hour is coming when any one who kills you 
will consider that he is doing religious service for God. 
4. I have spoken to you of these things in order that 
when the time for them comes you may remember that 
I told you about them myself. 

7. It is better for you that I should go away; for 
if I do not go the Helper will not come tv you; but if 
I goI will send him to you. 12. I still have many things 
to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13. But 
when the Spirit of Truth comes he will fuide you into 
all truth. 14. He will do honor to me: for he will take 
what is mine and unfold it to you. 

16. A little while and you will see me no more; and 
then a little while and you will see me. 19. Are you 
asking one another about my saying, A little while? 20. 
I tell you you will weep and mourn but the world will 
rejoice: you will be in grievous sorrow, but your sorrow 
shall turn to happiness. 21. A woman is sorrowful when 
she is bearing a child; but when the child is born she 
forgets her anguish. 22. You are sorrowful now; but 
I will see you again, and your hearts will be happy, and 
no one will take away your happiness. 

25. I have spoken these things to you in figurative 
language: the hour is coming when I shall not speak 
any longer in figures and symbols, but shall tell you 
plainly about the Father. 27. For the Father himself 
loves you, because you have loved me. 32. The hour 
is coming when you will all be scattered to your homes— 
that time has come—and I shall be left alone: yet I am 
not alone, because the Father is with me. 33. In the 


Ch. 16, 2-33 DEPARTURE AND RETURN 229 


world you will find trouble. But have courage! I have 
conquered the world. 


Verses 1 to 4 conclude the talk on persecution (xv, 18- 
xvi, 4) and serve to introduce the main subject of chapter 
xvi, the departure and the return of Jesus. Verses 4 to 14 
deal with the subject of Jesus’ departure. Why did Jesus 
go away at all and thus create the flood of questioning 
and discussion as to the time and method of his return? 
No Christian preacher in Ephesus could hold a congrega- 
tion without a good and sufficient answer to that query. 
John’s bold, unequivocal answer rises to the sublime re- 
ligious height of preaching that it was ‘‘better’’ that he 
should go away (7), for had he not done so Christians 
ever after would have remained in the state of the first 
disciples during his first stay with them, mere followers 
without vision or initiative. But on his return, he comes, 
bringing the Helper, the Holy Spirit, and this second stay 
of his ‘‘in the power of the Spirit’’ confers a far higher 
status upon his disciples since than that possessed in the 
first instance by those who were his companions in the flesh. 

John dares to say that we are not to be classed with 
those with whom he made his first stay; not as literal 
servants of a man of Nazareth as they seemed to be. We 
are no longer servants but friends. It was expedient 
for us that he go away; for the object of his going was 
to bring back the Holy Spirit to say ‘‘many things’’ (12) 
to us which they could not hear. The Christian religion 
is not a static system of teaching delivered once for all 
and thereafter to be taken on historical hearsay. It is a 
living, growing, developing thing. For on his second stay 
with us in the power of the Spirit, the ‘‘Spirit of Truth,”’ 
he is guiding us gradually ‘‘into all truth’’ (13). The 
more glorious our progress in the things of the Spirit, 
the more ‘‘honor’’ do we do Jesus (14), for it is the office 
of the Spirit of Truth to glorify him. 

Although used in quite a different connection, the words 


230 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of E. F. Scott form a very telling comment on verse 13. 
‘‘The disciples believed that along with his message Jesus 
had imparted the revealing and life-giving Spirit. His 
Gospel was not bound to a fixed tradition, but was capable 
of endless growth and self-renewal. It could take into 
itself new elements, and keep pace with the world’s move- 
ment, and appeal with a fresh meaning to every age.’’* 

John was altogether persuaded that during the inter- 
vening years of Jesus’ second stay in the power of the 
Spirit with them, Christian disciples then living had been 
cuided into truth not dreamed of or only dimly visioned 
by the first disciples. The all-consuming motive behind 
these Christian talks of his own was a hope of the highest 
intensity that they might ‘‘do honor to’’ Jesus (14) by 
convincing many that the Spirit of Truth was at work in 
them, making them a living proof that in the intervening 
half-century men had learned to know Jesus as a world 
savior. 

But Jesus’ going away was a bitter experience for his 
immediate comrades. On the eve of his departure, his 
‘fecoming again’’ with the gift of the Spirit which he would 
come bringing with him was then only promise and pros- 
pect while their disillusion and desolation were present 
and dire. The phrase ‘‘a little while’’ is used to comfort 
them with great effect and deep emotional appeal. ‘‘A 
little while’’ occurs twice in verse 16, twice in 17, again 
in 18, twice in 19; and the thought recurs throughout the 
chapter. For John, the words possess a double content 
of meaning and are put to a double purpose, one in their 
Jerusalem context and the other in an Ephesian one, a 
half-century later. 

In the first place, ‘‘a little while’’ implies that Jesus’ 
‘“eome again’’ (xiv, 3), which was only promise and pros- 
pect in Jerusalem, had turned since into realization and 
joy in Ephesus. John alternates in speaking of the send- 
ing of the Helper, meaning the Holy Spirit (xiv, 26; xvi, 7) 

1The Spirit in the New Testament, p. v. 


Ch. 16, 2-33 DEPARTURE AND RETURN 231 


and of the coming of Jesus himself (xiv, 28; xvi, 16) in 
such wise as to make it plain that to him the one is the 
object of the other. We must not forget that he is here 
answering the question, ‘‘How can a man who was put to 
death be the savior of the world?’’ The bearing upon his 
saviorhood of his death, says John, is that his going was 
of the nature of an errand to bring back the Spirit 
with him on his quick return. As it is usually expressed 
by scholars, John identifies the resurrection and the coming 
of the Spirit, and the Return of Christ. ‘‘The emphasis 
upon the Little While means that Jesus’ resurrection is 
virtually his final return to his disciples as the helper or 
spirit of truth to abide as a spiritual presence in their 
hearts.’’* Paul is authority for the statement that the 
cross was a stumbling-block to the Jews and foolishness to 
the Greeks. How to satisfy sincere Christian inquirers on 
this point was a main problem of this Christian preacher 
in Ephesus. His answer in the Fourth Gospel is that Jesus’ 
death was a going away on a particular errand and after 
his quick return, his second stay with his disciples in the 
power of the Spirit is much more fruitful for them than 
his first stay with those men of Galilee in the days of his 
flesh. 

In the second place, all this is applicable without any 
forcing, to the issue raised by the constant fear of per- 
secution in Ephesus. ‘‘You will be sorrowful but your 
sorrow will turn to happiness’’ (20). As Jesus upon the 
eross cried, ‘‘My God, why hast thou forsaken me?’’ (Mar. 
xv., 34), so it may seem to Christians of Ephesus in their 
dread of persecution beforehand that Jesus has gone away 
again and that God has forsaken them. But in the very 
hour and agony of actual persecution, loyal Christians will 
find that Jesus and the Father ‘‘will come’’ again and 
make their abode with them (xiv, 23). ‘‘A woman when 
she is bearing a child has sorrow, but when the child is 
born she remembers no more the anguish’’ (21). The 

2 Goodspeed, p. 30. 


ao Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


unearthly joy even displayed by early Christians not only 
in persecution but also in martyrdom ‘‘glorified the Father 
in the Son’’ in no uncertain way. ‘‘You now have sor- 
row: but I will see you again, and your hearts shall 
rejoice, and no one will rob you of your joy’’ (22). 

Here again the mystery religions make a fundamental 
contribution. The story of the restoration of Attis, the 
coming back of Persephone, the return of Osiris, all en- 
shrine the same religious teaching. (See comments on 
John 11.) The people of Asia Minor and of the Empire 
in general were as familiar with their religious meanings 
as they were with these tales themselves. Thus, these 
religions had ‘‘prepared the way’’ (Mar. i, 3) for the 
Christian gospel; for Christian leaders found a language 
and vocabulary ready to hand when they came to deal 
with inquirers who had had this religious training. One 
sentence, for example, in the ritual of Attis reads: ‘‘Be 
of good cheer, initiates, the god has been saved: Thus 
for you also shall there be salvation from your troubles.’’ ° 
Inquirers with this training would make good soil in 
which to sow the seed of the Gospel of Jesus’ second stay 
with his followers in the power of the Spirit. The philoso- 
phy in which they had been trained was a philosophy that 
it is always darkest before the dawn. They would be re- 
minded of the sorrow and anguish of the earth in her 
winter of labor, and of the succeeding springtime with its 
joy followed by its much fruit. They would be attracted 
to a Gospel that held human souls fast in loyalty to Jesus 
through any persecution or any personal sorrow or moral 
conflict into the springtime of the light of knowledge and 
into the sunshine of fruitfulness as they saw the Christian 
Gospel doing in Ephesus. 

The same line of thought supplies us with a fresh read- 
ing of the meaning of the later verses, 25 to 27. ‘‘The 
hour is coming when I shall no longer speak to you in 
figures and symbols, but shall tell you plainly of the 

? Kennedy, p. 91. 


Ch. 17, 3-26 Tue ParTING PRAYER 233 


Father.’’ These inquirers will be quick to see its meaning 
for them. In exchange for these symbols and allegories 
of the mystery religions, which, after all, are mere human 
speculation, this is an offer on the part of the Christian 
Gospel, of hours of mystic insight in communion with Jesus 
when the soul sees God in his goodness and feels his en- 
circling arm. Such moments convey to the Christian with 
a knowledge that is intuitive and unquestioning that ‘‘the 
Father himself loves’’ him (27). To the soul in the grip 
of the power of this inner experience, it matters not if in 
the world he has ‘‘trouble’’ (33). Really tribulation can- 
not harm and can bless in bringing one into closer company 
with him who in his tribulation could say ‘‘I have con- 
quered the world’’ (33). 


THE PARTING PRAYER 
JOHN XVII 


xvii, 3. This is life eternal, to know thee as the only 
true God, and to know Jesus Christ whom thou hast 
sent. 4. I have done honor to thee on the earth, and 
have completed the work which thou hast given me to 
do. 6. I have revealed thy true nature to the men whom 
thou gavest me. 7. They now recognize that all which 
thou hast given me comes from thee. 8. For I have 
given them the truths which thou gavest me; and they 
now believe that thou didst send me. 11. And now I 
am to be in the world no longer, but they are to remain 
in the world, while I come to thee. Holy Father, keep 
them by thy power. 12. While I was with them, I kept 
them, and [ guarded them. 13. But now I am to come 
to thee. 15. I am not praying thee to take them away 
from the world but to keep them from evil. 17. Con- 
secrate them to the truth: thy word is truth. 

18. As thou didst send me into the world so have I 
sent them into the world. 20. It is not for them only 
that I am making this prayer, but also for those who 
believe in me through their word; 21. I pray that they 


234 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


all may be one. 22. I have given them the glory which 
thou hast given me; 23. so that the world may recog- 
nize that thou lovest them just as thou lovedst me. 25. 
Righteous Father, 26. I have made known thy true 
nature to them and will continue to do so; so that the 
love which thou hast had for me may be in their hearts, 
and I may be there also. 


What was Jesus’ work? Did he come to sponsor a new 
teaching, or to be offered as a sacrifice for sin, or by miracle 
and resurrection to throw a blaze of light on the character 
of God and the immortality of the soul? Again, what 
is the work of the Christian Church? Is it to preserve the 
revelation of Jesus? Is it to keep itself unspotted from 
the world? This chapter answers all these questions in 
principle by a single thought which runs all the way 
through it: namely, the continuity of the life and love of 
God which first found complete expression or incarnation 
in Jesus and from him as Vine flowed as the life-sap into, 
and produced in, his disciples, the Branches, a life and love 
like unto itself (verses 4, 8, 11, 18, 22, 26). 

The inference all through the chapter is that however 
we conceive of Jesus’ life-work, similarily must we con- 
ceive of our own. If he came to suffer for sin, suffering 
for sin is our mission in life, too. If his work was to 
advance the knowledge of God among men, making new 
progress in revealing him is, also, our business in life. 
John does not leave us in doubt as to his idea of Jesus’ 
work: The love and the life which God had loved into life 
in him, was to be loved into the life of his disciples; he in 
them, they in him and God in them all. His share in this 
work which was given to him to do during his first stay 
with his disciples he ‘‘ecompleted’’ (4) and ‘‘finished’’ 
(xix, 28) with his last breath upon the cross. That work 
was resumed and is being continued on a “‘greater’’ (xiv, 
12) scale by his disciples during his second stay with them 
in the power of the spirit. This union or oneness of love 


Ch. 17, 3-26 THE PARTING PRAYER 235 


and life in God and Jesus and his disciples is the Himalaya 
peak of John’s Gospel. 

A distinguishing feature of this chapter compared with 
the preceding ones is its form. It is an intercessory prayer. 
But it should be remembered that John wrote it under the 
guidance of the Spirit and offered it before his assembled 
congregation on many occasions before he considered its 
publication. Perhaps the first suggestion, indeed, for giv- 
ing these chapters to the world was not his own, but came 
from his disciples. 

The fact that this chapter is already a prayer in form 
should make it particularly easy to follow the procedure 
recommended in the comments on chapters xiv and xv. 
Rules three and four coalesce since this is a prayer ad- 
dressed to God and speaks of Jesus at times in the third 
person. The exquisite beauty and hallowed associations 
of the words as they stand make any suggestion of a 
change even for a moment hazardous. Nevertheless, it will 
certainly give the prayer fresh significance if the reader 
will imagine himself seated in the congregation and par- 
ticipating with John as he enters into the spirit of Jesus 
and gives utterance to this prayer. The third person is used 
as far as the close of verse 3 exactly as any Christian of 
modern times would speak in prayer of ‘‘Jesus Christ 
whom thou didst send.’’ Then in verse 4 the ‘‘I’’ style 
begins. He, even Jesus Christ, did honor thee on the earth 
by completing the works which thou gavest him to do. 6. 
He manifested thy true nature to the men whom thou 
gavest him. 8. The truths which thou gavest him he gave 
to them. 11. Now he is no longer in the world and we 
are in the world. Holy Father, keep us by thy power 
that we may be one with Jesus, just as Jesus and his dis- 
ciples were one. 12. While he was with them he kept 
them; and he guarded them. 13. But now he has gone 
to thee. 15. We do not pray thee to take us out of the 
world, but to keep us from evil. 17. Consecrate us to the 
truth: thy word is truth. 18. As thou didst send him 


236 THr GOSPEL OF JOHN 


into the world just so has he sent us into the world. 19. 
He consecrated himself for our sakes in order that we also 
might be consecrated. 20. It is not for ourselves alone 
that we pray but also for those who believe on Jesus 
through our word. 21. May we all be one. 22. And the 
glory which thou gavest to Jesus he has given to us. 295. 
Righteous Father, the world did not know thee, but he 
knew thee, and his disciples knew that thou didst send 
him. 26. And he made known to them thy true nature, 
and he continues to make it known, so that the love with 
which thou didst love him is in our hearts. And may he, 
too, be in our hearts. 

Many of the most familiar ideas of the Gospel recur here. 
‘‘Life eternal’’ is the essence of salvation (3). Jesus’ 
‘‘work’’ in the flesh is ‘‘completed,’’ as we have noted, 
as he nears his death upon the cross (4). The word ‘‘work’’ 
carries its usual suggestion that it was the good works 
which he did which bear testimony to the fact that Jesus 
was Son of the Father. <A hint, also, appears of the char- 
acter of the ‘‘greater works’’ (v, 20; 1, 50; xiv, 12) which 
we as his disciples are to accomplish. In verse 5 the thought 
recurs of Jesus’ death as a glorifying of his work and of 
him. This positive interpretation of his death as of the 
nature of a triumph is here carried to such a height as to 
suggest fulfillment of the early Christian apocalyptic 
hope that Jesus would come with “‘glory’’ (22. Cf., Mar. 
xiii, 26). 

The fundamental idea of the Gospel that knowledge of 
God and life eternal are inseparables appears throughout 
the chapter. This is life eternal, to know thee as the 
only true God and to know Jesus as one whom thou didst 
send (3; Cf., 8, 23). Knowledge in this Gospel, as stated 
before, is no merely mental transaction. We have to go 
back to the figure of the vine to get its full force. It is 
the kind of knowledge that the life-sap in the branches 
gives the branches of the life of the vine. This thought 
furnishes the key to the meaning of the word ‘‘truth’’ 


Ch. 17, 3-26 THE PARTING PRAYER 237 


ebiseld +07... opirit, of ‘Truth, xiv, 17); ‘‘Truth;?’ also; 
is not an intellectual conquest. It is the fruit of the Vine, 
unknown, therefore, to any but the Branches that carry 
the life-sap which produces it. 

‘‘The world’’ (9, 11, 21, 23) is used with varying shades 
of meaning. ‘‘I pray not for the world’’ (9) must not 
be set off in isolation from its context. Jesus has been her- 
alded in this Gospel as ‘‘the Savior of the world’’ (iv, 42). 
It does not solve the apparent contradiction and difference 
of tone to say that one of these attitudes traces back to 
one ‘‘source’’ and the other to another; for here we have 
the two ideas interrelated within the same chapter. The 
astonishing claim is sometimes made that John considers 
it God’s plan to leave ‘‘the world’’ in general in darkness 
and selected ones only are to share in his light. Exactly 
the reverse is true. The world’s hope centered in that 
little circle. Verse 9 means that Jesus does care for the 
world and that the world in the end is to be the principal 
beneficiary of this particular petition. Again verse 23, 
‘‘That the world may know that thou didst send me,”’’ 
should not be taken as a plea for self-vindication on the 
part of Jesus; it is the expression of a genuine desire 
and even expectation that ‘‘the world may believe’’ (21). 

It is usually thought that John sets ‘‘Church’’ in a 
somewhat rigid way over against the world. (See our 
chapter, Characteristics of the Gospel.) Too much should 
not be made of this view. The word ‘‘Church’’ never 
occurs in the Gospel. It was a time of severe testing, 
of persecution, of false preachers who were mercenary, a 
time when the world drew a sharp distinction between 
‘its own’’ way of life and the Christian way of life. 
John agrees that a rigid line divides ordinary existence in 
the world from the life eternal in the fellowship of Jesus 
Christ. The bridge is always down, however, for any one 
who wishes to make the crossing. 


CHAPTER XVI 


LAST HOURS 
JOHN XVIII TO xx 


xviii, 1. Jesus went out with his disciples and crossed 
the Valley of the Cedars, where there was a garden, 
into which he went. 2. Now Judas knew the place: 
for Jesus had often met with his disciples there. 3. So 
Judas after securing the garrison of Roman soldiers, 
with some deputies from the chief priests and the Phar- 
isees, comes there with lanterns, torches and weapons. 
4. Jesus, with full knowledge of what was coming, says 
to them, Whom are you seeking? 5, They answered him, 
Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus says to them, I am he; 8. so if 
you are looking for me, let these men go. 9. This was 
in fulfillment of the word he had spoken, Of those whom 
thou hast given me I have lost none. 10. Simon Peter, 
who had a sword with him, drew it and struck at the 
high priest’s slave and cut off his right ear. The name 
of the slave was Malchus. 11. Then Jesus said to Peter, 
Put up your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink 
the cup which the Father has given me? 


The first twelve or thirteen chapters of John’s Gospel 
contain material, as has been said, which may have been 


previously used as the basis of public oral talks or appeals. 
The material in chapters xiv to xvii would seem to be the 


outgrowth of a ministry of prayer and meditation. Chap- 
ters xviii to xx differ somewhat from both these preceding 
sections for they consist for the most part of simple his- 


torical narrative. In form, they are personal reminiscences 


238 


Ch. 18, 1-11 Last Hours 239 


of Jesus’ last hours, devoid of sermonizing or symbol. All 
this may well correspond with the three aspects of the 
author’s ministry in Ephesus. At times an occasion would 
eall for the delivery of such a talk as is suggested in 
chapter vi. At other times he would lead his people in 
prayer and meditation. At rare intervals, the spirit would 
move him to give them his memories of Jerusalem days. 

At such times he did not hesitate to correct the closing 
events in Jesus’ life as given in Mark and to supplement 
with fresh detail. Even those who will not admit that 
this Gospel could have been written by an eye-witness still 
feel, as Bacon does, that the author had visited Jerusalem 
or even as Moffatt does that the author must have visited 
Jerusalem before its destruction in 70 a.p. They, also, con- 
cede that its author must have had access to a reliable 
source of information in regard to the events of these last 
days. Always the factor of editing of the Gospel enters 
in and complicates the problem. Passages, accordingly, 
which seem to combine the author’s narrative with that 
of a source or of an editor will be noted. But no one 
denies that these chapters include material of high his- 
torical value. 

One of the most striking matters of record in which 
John differs from the Markan synoptic story is the day 
of the arrest. Was Jesus arrested on the day before the 
Passover meal, or after the Passover supper? In other 
words, did the betrayal and the trial take place on the 
night before the Passover lamb was slain, and did the 
crucifixion therefore take place before the Passover day 
began? The Jewish day always began at sunset, and the 
Passover was eaten soon after sunset. The solution of the 
problem reduces itself to determining the right answer 
to the simple question: Did Jesus eat the Passover with 
his disciples? The one alternative, that Jesus did not, for 
he was crucified before the Passover day, is represented 
by John; the other by Mark, Matthew and Luke. Mark 
xiv, 12, 16, 18, state that ‘‘his disciples. . . made ready 


240 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the Passover. And as they were eating, Jesus said... 
one of you shall betray me.’’ John’s statement is just as 
definitely to the contrary. He says, xiii, 1, 2, 21, ‘‘Before 
the festival of the Passover during supper. . . Jesus said, 
One of you shall betray me.’’ After the trial before 
Caiaphas the Jews led Jesus to the Praetorium, “‘and they 
themselves did not enter, so that they might not be defiled, 
but might eat the Passover’’ (xviii, 28). The day of the 
Crucifixion ‘‘was the Preparation of the Passover’’ (xix, 
ies Cf.) xixj'81). 

Some important considerations decidedly favor the cor- 
rectness of John’s chronology. It is difficult to believe 
that the trials of Jesus, the assembling of the Sanhedrin, 
and the other events, could have taken place on the most 
holy night of the Jewish year. Moreover, certain details 
in Mark’s own narrative support the accuracy of John’s 
dating. For example, in planning two days before the 
Passover to take Jesus, the chief priests said, ‘‘ Not during 
the feast, lest there should be a tumult of the people’’ 
(Mar. xiv, 2). Again Mark (xv, 42), after the crucifixion, 
states that ‘‘it was the Preparation,’’ and it was usual to 
employ the word ‘‘Preparation’’ to denote the day before 
the Passover. Such is the usage in John xix, 31. It is 
easy to understand how, after the Eucharist had attained 
its great importance in early Christianity, the next gen- 
eration regarding it so from childhood might fall into the 
way of identifying the Last Supper with the Passover. 
This would be especially likely among those who under- 
stood that the original celebration of the Lord’s Supper 
occurred on Jesus’ last night in the flesh. This is the posi- 
tion taken by the synoptic gospels as distinguished from 
John. The key to the whole situation is the fact that 
Jewish Christianity identified the Last Supper with the 
Jewish Passover, while non-Jewish Christianity as repre- 
sented by John dissociated the two. 

Throughout chapters xviii to xx a general knowledge of 
Christian tradition on the part of his hearers is assumed 


Ch. 18, 1-11 Last Hours 241 


in this Gospel. In other words, John makes no claim to 
completeness as history for his narrative. It is rather a 
collection of personal memorabilia concerning Jesus. West- 
cott gives a list of incidents narrated in Mark and Mat- 
thew which are omitted by John: 1. The agony. 2. The 
traitor’s kiss. 3. The desertion by the disciples. 4. The 
whole account of the examination before the Sanhedrin. 
5. The mockery as prophet. 6. The council at daybreak 
(Mar. xv,1). 7. The mockery after condemnation. 8. The 
impressment of Simon. 9. The reproaches of spectators 
and of the robbers. 10. The darkness. 11. The ery, ‘‘My 
God, why hast thou forsaken me?’’ 12. The rending of 
the veil. 13. The confession of the centurion. Many other 
incidents recorded only by single synoptic gospels which 
are omitted by John are noted by Westcott. He does not 
include, however, in any of his lists the omission by John 
of the healing of the ear of the high priest’s servant (Luke 
xxii, 51; Cf., John xviii, 10). The character of these omis- 
sions has a bearing on the character of John’s narrative. 
Many of the omissions are of events of such a character 
as would occupy a reporter or a historian, but do not 
serve John’s purpose particularly, which is to magnify 
the mission on which Jesus came to men and to prepare the 
way for a portrayal of Jesus’ quick return for a second 
and much longer stay with his disciples in the power of 
the Spirit. 

The first eleven verses of chapter xviii illustrate four 
characteristics of the chapters as a whole. In the first 
place, John renders his narrative more circumstantial by 
giving additional details of time and place. In verse 1 
he states that Jesus went out and crossed the Kedron or 
Valley of the ‘‘Cedars.’’ John alone of the gospel writers 
thus informs us of the name of this ravine between Jeru- 
salem and the Mount of Olives. The name occurs often 
in the Old Testament, which brings its mention into line 
with his fondness for alluding to old Bible associations. 
Again in verse 10 John names the ‘‘certain one’’ (Mar. 


242 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


xiv, 47) who drew his sword and struck off the ear of the 
slave of the high priest. It was Simon Peter. Still again 
John alone gives the slave’s name, Malchus. 

In the second place, John represents Jesus’ knowledge of 
his spiritual oneness with the Father as enabling Jesus 
to face death with the same superior singleness and cer- 
tainty as his knowledge that he had been sent of God en- 
abled him to face his whole life in the flesh (4). This 
superior singleness and certainty in regard to his own 
course on the part of Jesus is characteristic of the Gospel. 
Not only is Jesus frequently represented as ‘‘ knowing what 
was coming’’ (4), but the Fourth Gospel, also, takes a 
marked interest in special predictions of Jesus and their 
subsequent fulfillment either during the ministry or later 
in the spiritual life of the larger Christian brotherhood. 
Here it states that the disciples were not molested, ‘‘in 
fulfillment of the word which Jesus had spoken, Of those 
whom thou hast given me, I have lost none’’ (9). 

A third characteristic of John’s narrative closely related 
to the preceding is the attention called by it to the dignity 
and majesty exhibited by Jesus in his last hours as com- 
pared with the suffering portrayed as uppermost in Mark. 
Note the things omitted by him as given in Westcott’s 
list above. In xviii, 1, Jesus has arrived in the garden, 
but John gives no description of his anguish. There is 
no reference to his saying, ‘‘My soul is exceeding sorrow- 
ful’’ (Mar. xiv, 34) ; nor to his prayer, ‘‘ Remove this cup 
from me’’ (Mar. xiv, 36); nor to the agony in which his 
sweat becomes ‘‘as it were great drops of blood’’ (Luk. 
xxii, 44). 

Finally, a fourth characteristic of John’s narrative of 
the arrest, trial and crucifixion is the omission of every 
miraculous element. Stories of miracle crowded upon him, 
asking to be included. But for some reason he turned 
every one aside. Possibly the explanation is that the ten- 
dency illustrated in so many of the apocryphal gospels 
to go to the wildest lengths of the absurd and the puerile 


Ch. 18, 1-11 Last Hours 243 


in this respect was already actively in process. Their weird 
stories of supernatural events would strongly repel a man 
of John’s highly spiritual attitude and mind. More prob- 
_ably, it was because the many miracle stories popularized 
by other religious and superstitious beliefs in Ephesus 
made John hesitate. Whatever the cause, his reticence 
in this matter is striking. In verse 10 he narrates that 
the servant’s ear was cut off. He adds the detail, even, 
found elsewhere only in Luke, that it was the right ear. 
Yet he makes no reference to the miracle recorded in Luke 
(xxii, 51) that Jesus touched the ear and healed it. Sim- 
ilarly the midday darkness recorded by all three Synop- 
tists is not mentioned at all. Still again the rending of 
the veil, recorded by Mark and Matthew, is omitted. The 
earthquake, the opening of the graves, the resurrection of 
the saints, are none of them to be found in John’s narra- 
tive. It would seem to be characteristic of John to observe 
a severe parsimony in the matter of miracle and to insist, 
when he does present one, upon interpreting it and driving 
home the spiritual principle or truth which it symbolizes 
(e.g., Joh. vi). There are not more than seven miracle 
narratives, as usually counted, in John’s entire Gospel, 
and with the possible exception of the Walking on the Sea 
(note the comments on that passage), it is obvious that for 
John the miracle is but the vestibule in which the reader 
is not expected to linger, but to pass on into the inner 
shrine. Here is further confirmation of how John’s inten- 
sively practical bent of mind and his convert-making task 
combine to persuade him to refuse to rest his case either 
on the distant in space or the historical or the apocalyptic 
in time. His preference, instead, is to point to his own 
Church members as living miracles through the gift of 
eternal life conferred upon them by Jesus during his sec- 
ond, unended and unending stay in the power of the Spirit 
among men. And we have the best of pagan testimony 
that these first-century Christians did not put the Chris- 
tian preacher to shame who held them up to inquirers as 


244 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


the best evidence of the change from ordinary existence 
wrought in men by the gift of Eternal life. 


THE TRIAL OF JESUS 
JOHN xvi, 12—xrx, 16 


xviii, 18. And they brought him first to Annas. For 
he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high 
priest. 

15. Now Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did an- 
other disciple. That disciple was acquainted with the 
high priest and so entered in with Jesus, 16. while Peter 
stood outside by the door. 19. The high priest ques- 
tioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. 20. 
Jesus answered, I have spoken openly to the world. 
21. Ask those who have heard. 22. When he said this, 
one of the deputies struck Jesus and said, Is that the 
way you speak to the high priest? 23. Jesus answered, 
If I have said anything wrong, give evidence about it; 
but if not, why do you strike me? 24. Annas then sent 
him still bound to Caiaphas, the high priest. 

26. One of the slaves, a relative of the one whose 
ear Peter had cut off, says, Did I not see you with him 
in the garden? 27. Peter again denied it; and at that 
minute a cock crowed. 

28. Then they bring Jesus from Caiaphas to the 
Roman palace; but they themselves did not enter. 33. 
Pilate called Jesus and said, Are you the king of the 
Jews? 36. Jesus answered, My kingdom is not a king- 
dom of this world. 37. Pilate said, Then you are a 
king? Jesus answered, It is as you say. The purpose 
for which I was born, for which I came into the world 
was to bear testimony to the truth. 38. Pilate says to 
him, What is truth? And he went outside to the Jews, 
and says to them, I find nothing with which he can be 
charged. 

xix, 1. Then Pilate took Jesus and had him scourged. 
5. Then Jesus came outside wearing the crown of thorns 


Ch. 18, 13—19, 16 TRIAL OF JESUS 245 


and the purple robe. And Pilate says to them, Here 
is the Man. 12. Pilate was anxious to release him, 
but the Jews cried out. 14. Pilate says to the Jews, 
Here is your King. 15. Then they cried out, Away 
with him! Crucify him! 16. Then he delivered Jesus 
to them to he crucified. 


The examination before Annas is one of John’s con- 
tributions to the history of the last hours. It is not men- 
tioned in the other gospels. As no other motive or reason 
is apparent for its insertion, it is to be taken as a bit of 
genuine history which supplements the synoptic narrative. 
The situation thus created has its difficulties but they only 
enhance its general historical probability. Jesus was led 
to Annas first because Annas ‘‘was the father-in-law of 
Caiaphas, who was high priest.’’ It is not easy to see the 
point in this. But perhaps that fact is in favor of its 
accuracy. Annas was high priest from 6 to 15 a.v. Caia- 
phas was high priest from 18 a.p. until 36. Sons of Annas 
held the office before and after Caiaphas. Annas seems 
to have been a sort of consultant expert to whom the 
reigning high priest through all these years turned when he 
had a particularly difficult problem to solve. (Cf., especially 
Luk. ii, 2; also Acts iv, 6.) John does not give Annas the 
title high priest until verse 15; he repeats this title in 
19; then in 24 he says Annas sent him to ‘‘Caiaphas, the 
high priest.’’ 

‘‘Peter followed Jesus and so did another disciple’’ 
(15). One other disciple is singled out and here linked 
with Peter in much the same way as the Beloved Disciple 
is associated with him in xx, 2 ff. Somewhat the same 
situation seems to have existed in the conversation at the 
table, xiii, 23, 24; similarly also in xxi, 20. It is not 
unlikely, therefore, that the disciple referred to in all these 
instances is the same—the Beloved Disciple. ‘‘That dis- 
ciple was acquainted with the high priest.’’ It is exceed- 
ingly improbable that this could be the Galilean fisherman, 


246 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


John, the son of Zebedee, for the likelihood that he had 
ever formed the acquaintance of the high priest is negli- 
gible. But the statement becomes very natural and easy 
of credence if the other disciple referred to is the Ephesian 
writer of the Fourth Gospel who had once been a resident 
of Jerusalem. 

‘‘Peter denied again; and at that minute a cock crowed’’ 
(27). Peter’s threefold denial of Jesus was never for- 
gotten by early Christians. As stated before, the entire 
account of the assembling of the Sanhedrin, the calling of 
witnesses and the whole procedure before that body, is 
assumed and never referred to by John. But Peter’s 
denial, which took place during the same trial, according 
to Mark, is referred to and included. There are two rea- 
sons for this exception. In the first place, the author is 
interested in pointing out another instance of a predic- 
tion of Jesus fulfilled (Cf., xviii, 3). In the second place, 
it is to be noted that a good deal is made of the denial 
and the tale of it told at some length. This Gospel does 
not picture Peter as the perfect or principal Apostle. 
It does not even mention that Peter, after his three denials, 
went out and wept bitterly (Mar. xiv, 72; Mat., xxvi, 75; 
Luk. xxii, 62). 

Attention to the dignity and majesty exhibited by Jesus 
in his last hours is further called at various points through- 
out the trial. In verse 20, instead of answering the ques- 
tion of Annas, Jesus states that his teaching is publicly 
known. ‘‘Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard 
me’’ (21). For the fancied lack of respect in this answer 
he was struck by an officer. Pilate himself is impressed 
and by no means puts his question in a tone of mockery, 
‘*What is truth?’’ (38). 

Another interesting characteristic of the narrative is the 
emphasized way in which it fixes the responsibility for the 
death and crucifixion of Jesus on the Jews. He makes 
use of Pilate’s hesitancy in crucifying Jesus (Cf., Mar. xv, 
14, 15), to throw the blame as far as possible upon the 


Ch. 19, 26—20,29 DEATH AND RESURRECTION 247 


Jews. Pilate, it is made to appear, treats Jesus almost 
with respect as he questions him. After an examination 
of him, Pilate reports to the Jews waiting outside: ‘“‘I 
find no basis for an indictment’’ (38). Then he makes 
the direct request that in fulfilling the Passover custom 
of releasing a captive he may have their consent to free 
Jesus. There is little or no doubt that we are meant to 
understand that his motive in the scourging (xix, 1) was 
to appease the Jews so that they would relent and not 
demand the extreme penalty. Again, Pilate pleads in 
xix, 4, as in xviii, 38, ‘‘I find no grounds for a charge 
against him.’’ In xix, 5, is the famous Ecce Homo, 
‘‘Behold, the Man!’’ found only in John. Pilate’s motive 
in thus centering all eyes on ‘‘the man’’ was to arouse the 
Jews to mercy at the pitiable sight. But this appeal also 
failed. Still again in xix, 12, we read that once more 
Pilate sought to release him after a later examination, 
‘“but the Jews eried out.’’ 

According to the Fourth Gospel, therefore, the entire 
responsibility for Jesus’ death lay with the Jewish leaders. 
This seems also a safe and sane historical judgment; for 
the unlikelihood is extreme that the Romans would be 
alarmed by such a peace-loving leader as Jesus. The 
‘‘seribes and Pharisees,’’ on the other hand, would be 
likely to carry their purpose to remove him from their 
path to the bitter death because of the fundamental con- 
flict between Jesus’ teaching and their ceremonial and 
priestly religion. 


THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS 
JOHN xXIx, 26—xx, 29 


xix, 26. Jesus, seeing his mother and the disciple 
whom he loved standing near, says to his mother, There 
is your son! 27. Then he says to the disciple, There 

is your mother! And from that hour the disciple took 
her into his own home. 

28. After this, Jesus, knowing that everything was 


248 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


now finished, says, I am thirsty. 380. When Jesus had 
received the wine he said, It is finished; and he bowed 
his head and gave up his spirit. 

35. And he who has seen it testifies to it, and his 
statement is a true one; and he knows that he is speak- 
ing the truth, so that you also may believe. 

xx, 1. On the first day of the week Mary Magdelene 
comes to the tomb very early while it is still dark, and 
sees the stone taken away from the tomb. 2. She runs, 
and comes to Simon Peter and to that other disciple 
whom Jesus loved, and says to them, They have taken 
away the Master out of the tomb! 4. And the other 
disciple ran faster than Peter, and came to the tomb 
first. 6. Simon Peter arrives soon after him, and he 
went into the tomb. 8. Then the other disciple went 
inside also, and he saw and believed. 10. Then the 
disciples went away again. 

11. But Mary was standing outside the tomb, weep- 
ing. While she was weeping, she bent over and looked 
into the tomb. 12. And she perceives two angels in 
white. 14. She turned away and perceives Jesus stand- 
ing there. 16. Jesus says to her, Mary. She turns and 
says to him, Rabboni. 17. Jesus says, Hold me not; for 
I have not yet ascended to the Father: but go to my 
brethren and say, I am going up to my Father. 

19. In the evening of the same day, and while the 
doors were shut where the disciples were, Jesus came 
in and stood among them. And he says to them, Peace 
be with you. 22. And he breathed on them, and says 
to them, Receive the Holy Spirit. 

26. And a week later the disciples were again in the 
house, and Thomas was with them. Jesus comes, and 
he said, Peace be with you. 27. Then he says to Thomas, 
Put your finger here, and look at my hands; and be not 
an unbeliever, but a believer. 28. Thomas answered, My 
Master and my God. 29. Jesus says to him, Is it because 


Ch. 19, 26—20,29 DEATH AND RESURRECTION 249 


you have seen that you have believed? Blessed are 
those who have not seen, and yet have believed. 


The scene in which Jesus beholds his mother from the 
eross introduces us for the second time to the ‘‘disciple 
whom Jesus loved’? (Cf., xiii, 23; note also xviii, 15). 
That mother lived in Nazareth and thus had no home in 
Jerusalem. If our identification of the Beloved Disciple is 
correct, his home, however, was not far away and he would 
naturally feel a pride in recounting this striking proof 
that Jesus gave as to the closeness of their friendship even 
long years afterward. It is interesting to note that West- 
cott and other commentators who hold that the Beloved 
Disciple was the John of Galilee, who was one of the Twelve, 
feel it necessary to explain in one way or another that 
“it does not follow that St. John’s ‘home’ was at Jeru- 
salem.’’ Other things being equal, the simpler meaning 
of the words is to be preferred, 7.¢., that the beloved disciple 
did live in Jerusalem and that the word ‘‘hour’’ is to be 
understood in a literal or nearly literal sense. ‘‘ And from 
that hour the disciple took her into his home.’’ 

It is easy to dismiss the problem of the identity of this 
disciple by saying that he is evidently an imaginary figure. 
The same could be said with equal arbitrariness regarding 
any other figure in the Gospel. Nicodemus may be an imag- 
inary character. The nameless woman at the well, also, 
may be one. To be sure, Bacon is not alone in holding 
that if Jesus could truthfully be said ever to have had this 
real ‘‘beloved disciple,’’ he would be one of the Twelve 
and Peter that one. Both this resort to an imaginary 
Beloved Disciple and the arguments in its behalf, however, 
are a by-product of the assumption that this Fourth Gospel 
could not have been written by a personal disciple of Jesus. 
(See the earlier chapters on authorship, and the popular 
quality of the Gospel.) 

‘‘Hverything was now finished’’ (28). That this is a 


250 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


statement of the first importance is shown by the repetition 
in verse 30, ‘‘It is finished,’’ and by such anticipatory 
phrases as that of having ‘‘completed the work which thou 
hast given me to do’’ (xvii, 4). In John’s conception of 
Jesus his death was a mere hyphen, a short gap between 
his first stay with men in the fiesh and his second stay with 
them in the power of the Spirit. His life before and after 
were the all-important facts. Not his Going but his Com- 
ing, both the first and the second times; not his leaving 
the flesh but his taking it, were the immensely significant 
things. 

John’s attitude stands in open contrast to that of Paul. 
With Paul the death and resurrection were all-important. 
For John, the Jesus who stayed with men in the flesh is 
the same Jesus that he was before and has been since; he 
does not change. Not his single Going but his Comings, 
both the First and the Second, constitute the last word of 
proof of God’s love for the world of men. For Paul, 
on the other hand, the Jesus who stayed with men in 
the flesh is not the same Jesus that he has been since; his 
death and resurrection wrought a change in him and con- 
ferred power and status upon him thereafter immeasur- 
ably superior to that which he displayed in the days of his 
flesh. 

It is difficult to understand verse 35 as anything else 
than a claim on the part of the author to have been present 
at the death of Jesus. The words are strikingly parallel 
with those of I John i, 1, 3, ‘‘That which we have seen 
with our eyes, that which we beheld and our hands handled 
. . . that which we have seen and heard declare we to 
you.’’ Both passages have been accounted for as instances 
of the realism ascribed by its devotee to mystical experi- 
ence and knowledge. But some such explanation as this 
is foreed upon those who accept too late a dating of the 
writings for them to be the words of an eye-witness. To — 
one who believes that the Gospel was written by the Be- 
loved Disciple, the words are but the natural language of 


Ch. 19, 26—20,29 DEATH AND RESURRECTION 251 


one who vouches for the truth of the account which he 
has given of Jesus Christ, whom God did send. 

The ‘‘disciple whom Jesus loved’’ (xx, 2) appears again 
in the story of the resurrection. This time the word for 
“‘loved’’ is a different one, but the reference is the same. 
Bacon and others point out that, as in xiii 23, this disciple 
takes precedence over Peter here again. It is stated in 
xx, 1-10, that the Beloved Disciple was able to run the 
faster of the two, which, as we remarked before, coincides 
again with our view that the Beloved Disciple was a lad 
of Jerusalem, who would naturally be more agile than 
the older Peter. His hesitancy in entering the tomb first 
would accord again with his youth. The fact that he did 
enter when Peter arrived is discordant with the view held 
by some that the ‘‘ideal’’ disciple was a representative of 
those who would believe without seeing (Cf., xx, 29). 

The abrupt return of the narrative to the tomb after 
departing with Peter and the other disciple at xx, 11, 
seems to many an example of the kind of thing which goes 
to show that in its present form this Gospel is not entirely 
the work of a single hand. All through the Gospel are 
various evidences of the work of an editor. Probably John 
himself inserted links of connection to bind together some- 
what less loosely the independent units of which it is made. 
Almost certainly the Gospel was later revised also by the 
editor who wrote chapter xxi. (See our discussion on 
the Authorship of the Gospel.) Most scholars hold that it 
betrays evidence of the use by the author also of written 
sources. That he did make some use of them is quite cer- 
tain in case he had not been in Jerusalem personally at 
the time of Jesus’ death. But the view for which we have 
contended in our chapter on the Popular Quality of the 
Gospel is that where he gives us independent material 
John’s sources aside from his own knowledge were for the 
most part not written but popular sources. In other words, 
John, instead of having in his possession an early manu- 
script of considerable extent, simply took those narratives 


252 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN 


of Jesus’ life which had stood the test of popular approval 
and were current coin, and made his selection from them. 
This might be called a democratic view of the problem of 
authorship and sources. 

It is not surprising, therefore, to find two narratives 
as independent as xx, 2-10, and xx, 11-18. For example, 
Mary, although alone at the time of verse 11 as she was 
in verse 1, yet in 2-10 speaks as though others were with 
her (Cf., Mar. xvi, 1). Verse 2 and verse 13 might be called 
evidence of the existence of duplicate versions of the same 
incident, the difference being that in verse 2 Mary says 
‘‘we’’ while in verse 13 she uses “‘I.’’ Verse 2 reads: 
‘‘They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we 
know not where they have laid him.’’ Verse 13 reads: 
‘“They have taken away my Lord and I know not where 
they have laid him.’’ It has also been pointed out that 
the statement that Mary runs to tell the disciples is thus 
repeated. Verse 2 reads: ‘‘She runs and comes to Peter 
and the other disciple. ..and says.’’ Verse 18 reads: 
‘‘She comes and tells the disciples.’? Other indications 
that we have here two independent narratives are well 
given by Garvie (p. 183), although Garvie himself is not 
convinced that they are decisive. Many other apparent 
doubles have been noted, as for example in the narrative 
that they ‘‘took away the body of Jesus’’ for burial (xix, 
GOs Cf 2, xk AOS 

All such detailed study of John’s Gospel serves to show 
the more clearly its popular, flexible, democratic quality. 
John took the material at his disposal and under his large 
and free handling, it became molded into the most spiritual 
and best loved book of the ages. 

Certain particulars of its resurrection narrative are 
peculiar to this Gospel. John does not record the Ascension 
of Jesus. This is in line with his emphasis upon Jesus’ 
life rather than upon his death, or things closely connected 
with it, upon his first stay with his disciples in the flesh, and 


Ch. 19, 26—20,29 DEATH AND RESURRECTION 253 


his second stay in the power of the Spirit with his later 
disciples who ‘‘have not seen and yet have believed.’’ 
John closes his Gospel not with the Ascension but with 
a picture of closest sympathetic intimacy to the very end 
between Jesus and his Galilean disciples, including even 
the doubter. 

Another particular peculiar to the Fourth Gospel is the 
time and place at which it states the first giving of the 
Holy Spirit occurred. Luke records the descent of the 
Holy Spirit as taking place on the day of Pentecost (Acts 
ii, 1-4; cf. esp. Acts i, 5, 8). John, it will be remembered 
(see comments on John xiv) makes the Holy Spirit the 
object of Jesus’ going and the return of Jesus always 
means to him the coming of the Spirit, for to him the object 
of Jesus’ return and second stay with his later disciples 
was to confer this gift of the Spirit upon them. Hence 
we are not surprised to read in this particular Gospel 
that at Jesus’ reappearance to his Galilean disciples ‘‘he 
breathed on them, and says to them, Receive the Holy 
Spirit’? (22). The Holy Spirit came later, Acts ii, 4 ap- 
pears to say and quite apart from the personal presence 
of Jesus. Jesus ‘‘parted from’’ his disciples (Luk. xxiv, 
51), but John is not interested in the parting, which was 
only for a little while, so much as he is in his return, which 
would be soon; thereafter to be with them continually and 
continuously. 

John’s whole account of the resurrection is marked by 
a high degree of spiritual reserve. Although Thomas re- 
ceives the invitation to touch Jesus there is no direct 
statement that he did so. In fact Jesus does not say, 
Reach out and put your finger on the spot, but, Reach out 
your finger and see. He looks upon the resurrection from 
a lofty religious plane. What he sees and how he sees 
it presents a deep contrast with the more physical or cir- 
cumstantial narratives in the appendix (chapter xxi) or in 
Luke or even in Matthew. The discovery of the empty 


254 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


tomb, the question as to where the body has been taken, 
Mary’s vision, the appearance to the Twelve, the breathing 
of the Holy Spirit, are the successive steps, quickly taken, 
by which John lifts his audience from physical to more and 
more spiritual conceptions; and thus prepares the way for 
his triumphant appeal to his Ephesian listeners: ‘‘ Blessed 
are those who have not seen, and yet have believed’’ (xx, 
29). The tremendous special meaning of the word ‘‘believe’’ 
in this Gospel has been explained in our comments on 
John xv. 


THE PURPOSE OF THE GOSPEL 
JOHN xx, 30, 31 


xx, 80. There are many other signs which Jesus 
showed which are not written in this book; 31. these have 
been written that you may believe that Jesus is the - 
Christ, the Son of God; and that through believing you 
may have Life by his power. 


These words form the original conclusion of the Gospel. 
Chapter xxi was added after the death of the author 
(xxi, 23) to obtain a wider acceptance for the Gospel (a) 
by giving recognition to the growing preeminence of Peter, 
(b) by including one story of an appearance of Jesus in 
Galilee (Cf., Mat. xxviii, 16), and finally (c) by indicating 
more plainly the identity of the author of the Gospel. 
(See chapter on authorship.) John’s own conclusion to 
his Gospel (xx, 30, 31) characterizes it as a collection of 
*‘sions’’ selected out of Jesus’ ministry in Judea and 
in Galilee. These signs are explained by John as having 
significance not only with regard to Jesus’ divine mission 
during his first stay in the flesh with his earliest disciples, 
but also with regard to his continued spiritual work during 
his second stay in the power of the Spirit among his 
later disciples. John thus gave to Jesus’ life a universal 
and eternal meaning. But he employed no abstract method 
in doing it. He portrayed a flesh and blood Jesus, but in 


Ch. 20, 30-31 THE PURPOSE OF THE GOSPEL 255 


such fashion that each act selected by him became an ex- 
ample and a sign under the wizardry of his interpretative 
skill. He internationalized and universalized Jesus by ex- 
tracting from his deeds spiritual significance and power 
of the highest potential. 


= ne v ve Yt Le nS E Peale i 


Ar ai) a gy sacs ay - aoe? Fay wy pee 









eis) 1 

ieee i ‘i S ?) 
att) bs Sy ¥ st Lis nt Ty 
1 ¥ 5 a Mm nn t , ; : 
| | va 


y | “whee weit is 
ta Ranaut CLIMB, ek mys atoll idan’ . 


Fy Aah elie 


er 


bts 
iy 


Pee ae aaa: Nie iin oe 
Th | tatean oni 


Luh 
<a ! ; 
’ 
q 
i) 
: 
1 
’ 
é a 
j 
,- 
' 
a 
’ 
sy i , 
} y 
f i 
¥ ‘ , r | 
1 4a at i ‘ ; 
q aw, | Via¢ a, 
, ‘ . ' | 
, 
‘ 
¢ t 
‘ j ; f 
v oe | i 5 f 
: f i so F ay ie 
AL b@ olp + ' ya's . oy / 
of Peat ft f 
ah hae, | r é ¥ i 


A, REFERENCE LIBRARY 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES 


Reo 


Wika hoes 
a , 7 
ie ‘ 4 
a 5 ; 
7, 

| 
‘ " 

} 
’ 





nm hi, viy 474, ak 


wo lka 


el B 





a 7 
ay 


i HOWE wi Bs 


at 


ea FD .. 


Oe a a ta Ee ee: Q 


e 





A REFERENCE LIBRARY 


Books have been mentioned in the present volume usually 
by author only. Where two books by the same author 


are listed here, reference has been to the first title, unless 
otherwise stated. 


COMMENTARIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


B. F. Westcott, St. John’s Gospel; a volume of The Bible 
Commentary, New York, Scribner’s. Originally pub- 
lished in 1882. 

Westcott’s commentary is scholarly, but makes little use of 
historical, critical research. 

B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. 
The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes, London, 
Murray, 1908. 

This posthumous revised edition is based upon the Greek Text, 
but does not differ greatly in point of view from the volume 
of the Bible Commentary. 

FE. Gopret, Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, New 
York, Funk and Wagnalls; French original published 
in 1864. 

Godet’s exposition is not critical, but his comments are often 
brilliant and religiously valuable. 

Marcus Dons, The Gospel of St. John. Expositor’s Greek 
Testament, Hodder and Stoughton, 1897. 

Thoroughly conservative. Homiletically useful. 

J. A. McCuymont, Volume on St. John in the Century 
Bible, Frowde, 1901. 

A brief pocket commentary, conservative and uncritical. 

259 


260 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


E. J. Goopspreep, The Gospel of John, American Institute 
of Sacred Literature, University of Chicago, 1917. 43 
pages. 

A syllabus with assignments and questions, for use in a Bible 
study class. Thoroughly modern, critical and scholarly. 


In German there are the critical commentaries of H. J. 
Holtzmann and of W. Heitmiuller, the radical work of J. 
Wellhausen, the conservative commentary of B. Weiss, the 
large orthodox volume of T. Zahn, and the brief modern 
popular one of W. Bauer. 

In French there is the critical commentary of A. Loisy, 
Le Quatriéme Evangile, 1903, 2d ed., 1921. 


INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL 


An attempt has been made to arrange these titles in the 
order of their practical usefulness in connection with 
study of the present volume. But some readers will 
prefer one book, some another. All those listed are well 
written, and there are many others as well not mentioned 
here. 


EK. F. Scort, The Fourth Gospel, Its Purpose and Theology, 
Edinburgh, 1906; Seribner, 1908. 
A detailed exposition of the theology of the Gospel. 
K. F. Scort, The Historical and Religious Value of the 
Fourth Gospel, Houghton, 1909. Now published by 


the Pilgrim Press. 
A thoroughly modern introduction in very brief compass. (Price 
about 40c.) 


Percy GarpNner, The Ephesian Gospel, Crown Theological 
Library, New York, Putnam, 1915. 
A sketch of the main features of the Gospel and its HEphesian 
environment. 
B. W. Bacon, The Fourth Gospel iv Research and Debate, 
Moffatt, 1910. 
A comprehensive, critical discussion of questions concerning 
authorship. 


A REFERENCE LIBRARY 261 


JAMES Morratt, An Introduction to the Literature of the 
New Testament. Scribner, 1911 (pp. 515 to 619). 


An excellent, condensed review of the problems and the liter- 
ature bearing upon them. 


V. H. Stanton, The Gospels as Historical Documents, Part 
III. The Fourth Gospel, Cambridge, 1920. 


Defends the general historical accuracy of the Gospel, but does 
not claim for it direct, apostolic authorship. 


H. L. Jackson, The Problem of the Fourth Gospel, Cam- 
bridge, 1918. 

A small volume discussing problems of authorship. Contains 

a good presentation of all material bearing upon the dis- 

tinction between the Beloved Disciple and the Son of Zebedee. 


A. E. Garvir, The Beloved Disciple, London, Hodder; New 
York, Doran, 1922. 

Recent, scholarly, conservative. Distinguishes three authors 
in. the Gospel: The Witness, the Evangelist, the Redactor. 
The Miracle at Cana and the Raising of Lazarus are among 
the narratives of the Witness. 


C. F. Burney, The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel, 
Oxford, 1922. 


Finds Aramaic elements in the Gospel. Largely a linguistic 
study. Includes a good statement concerning the John men- 
tioned by Irenaeus (pp. 188 ff.). 


F. C. Burxitr, The Gospel History and Its Transmission, 
2d ed., Scribner, 1907. 


Burkitt holds the Fourth Gospel was written by the Beloved 
Disciple, not the Apostle. 


EH. J. Goopsprrep, The Story of the New Testament, Uni- 
versity of Chicago Press, 1916 (pp. 114 to 124). 


An unusually vivid introduction not a dozen pages in; length. 


EK. D. Burton, A Short Introduction to the Gospels, Uni- 
versity of Chicago Press, 1904 (pp. 99 to 141). 


Internal evidence of the Gospel regarding author and editor. 


A. Narrne, Johannine Writings, London, 1918. 


262 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


R. H. Stracwan, The Fourth Gospel, Its Significance and 
Environment, London, Student Christian Movement, 
LOTS 

Nairne and Strachan give able presentations of Johannine 
Teaching. 

P. W. ScumrepeL, The Johannine Writings, Macmillan, 

1908. 


E. H. Asxwiru, The Historical Value of the Fourth Gos- 
pel, London, 1910. 


F. W. Worstey, The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists, 
Seribner, 1909. . 
Schmiedel holds the Gospel is a second-century Christogical 
treatise. Askwith and Worsley are moderately conservative. 
W. Sanpay, The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, Scribner, 
1905. 


J. DrumMonp, An Inquiry into the Character and Author- 
ship of the Fourth Gospel, Seribner, 1904. 


H. H. Wenpt, The Gospel According to St. John: An In- 
qury wmto Its Genesis and Historical Value, Scribner, 
1902. 

Sanday and Drummond maintain direct apostolic authorship 


and historical accuracy and order. Wendt does the same in 
a modified way. 


German publications on the Gospel are too numerous 
to be listed here. See Moffatt, pp. 515-519. That German 
interest is still active is evidenced by the recent volume, 
Untersuchungen tiber die Entstehung des vierten Evangel- 
wums, Bd. ii. Von Julius v. Grill, Tiibingen, 1923. Pro- 
fessor Grill is almost too thoroughgoing in relating John’s 
Gospel to the Hellenistic mystery religions. 

In French there is the work of A. Loisy, Les Mystéres 
parens et le Mystére Chrétien, Paris, 1919. 


BOOKS ON RELATED SUBJECTS 


S. J : a The Evolution of Early Christianity, Chicago, 


A REFERENCE LIBRARY 263 


F. Cumont, Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism, Chi- 
cago, 1911. 

C. Cremen, Primitive Christianity and Its Non-Jewish 
Sources, Edinburgh, 1912. 

H. A. A. Kennepy, St. Paul and the Mystery Religions, 
London, Hodder, 1913. 

Percy GarpNner, The Religious Experience of St. Paul, 
Putnam, 1911. 

B. W. Rosrnson, Life of Paul, Chicago, 1918. 

A. DrissmMAnn, Light from the Ancient Hast, Hodder and 
Stoughton. New edition has been announced. En- 
larged German edition, 1928. 

C. D. Lamperton, Themes from St. John’s Gospel in Early 
Roman Catacomb Painting, Princeton University 
Press, 1911. 

G. Mituican, Here and There among the Papyri, Doran, 
1922. 

EK. F. Scort, The Spirit in the New Testament, Doran, 1923. 

BE. D. Burton, The Teaching of Jesus, A Source Book, 
Chicago, 1923. 

E. J. Goopspeep, The New Testament. An American Trans- 
lation, Chicago, 1923. 


DICTIONARIES 


The reader of the Gospel of John will do well to make 
constant use of a Bible Dictionary. 


J. Hastines, Dictionary of the Bible, 5 vols., Seribner, 
1898-1904. 

T, K. CHEyNE ann J. 8. Buacx, Encyclopaedia Biblica, 4 
vols. (India Paper edition in one volume), Macmillan, 
1899-1903. 


J. Hastinas, Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, 2 vols., 
Seribner, 1906-1908. 


264 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 

M. W. Jacosus, Standard Bible Dictionary, 1 vol., Funk 
and Wagnalls, 1909. 

J. Hastinas, Dictionary of the Bible, 1 vol., Scribner, 1909. 


S. MatHews anp G. B. Suiru, Dictionary of Religion and 
Ethics, 1 vol. ($3.00), Macmillan, 1921. 


INDEX OF SUBJECTS 


(Bold faced figures indicate places of principal discussion) 


Abbott, 21. 

Adoptionist Christology, 73. 

Adultery, woman taken in, 154 f. 

Allegory, 142 f. See also Symbol. 

“And,” use of, 45, 88. 

Anointing, 208 ff. 

Aphrahat, 14. 

Apollos, 73. 

Apocalypses, John’s little, 79 f. 

Apocalyptic, 36, 132, 198. See 
also Second Coming, and Day 
of Judgment. 

Appendix, 11f., 254. 

Authorship, 11 ff.; reasons against 
apostolic, 15; eyewitness, 22; 
conclusions, 27. 


“Back to Jesus,” 56. 

Bacon, 14, 16, 23, 214. 

Baptism of Jesus, 70 f. 

Baptism, rite of, 69, 98 f., 109. 

Belief in Jesus, 42, 101, 228 ff. 

Beloved Disciple. See Disciple 
whom Jesus loved. 

Birth from above, 94 ff. 

Blind man healed, 167. 

Blind soldier healed, 46. 

Blindness, spiritual, 173; of the 
Pharisees, 169. 

Body of Christ, 91. 

Bousset, 17. 

Bread, figurative, 189 ff., 151 f. 

Brooke, 24, 103. 

Browning, 28. 

Burkitt, 17. 

Burney, 13, 17. 

Burton, E. D., 21, 24, 54. 


Case, S. J., 62, 64, 97, 164, 193, 
195. 

Catacombs, 53. 

Characteristics of the Gospel, 29 
ff. 

Church, John’s idea of, 37, 237. 

Communion service, 189 ff., 152 f. 

Contrasts in the Gospel, 47. 

Conversational style, 47. 

Conversion or second birth, 
96 f. 

Country, Jesus’ own, 121 f. 

Cross-references, 49 f. 


Darkness, 102; see also Light. 

Day of Crucifixion, 239 ff. 

Day of Judgment, 31, 67, 112. 

Dead, awakening of the, 181 ff., 
135.1, 

Death, spiritual, 52f., 124, 134, 
151, 188 ff., 197. 

Death of Jesus, see Jesus. 

Deification, 96. 

Deissmann, 6, 17, 25, 45, 46, 76, 
124, 177, 206, 214. 

Demon possession, 168. 

Disciple whom Jesus loved, 11 ff., 
15 ff, 212 ff., 245, 249, 251; at 
the last supper, 16; at the 
cross, 17 f.; at the empty tomb, 
18; mentioned in the appendix, 
1,19; meaning of term “loved,” 
18 ff. 

Doctrine, 50. 

Dramatic style, 30, 50, 150. 

Dualism, 97, 111f.; of the 
Greeks, 60 f. 


265 


266 


Easter fire at Jerusalem, 163. 

Education, 157 f. 

Eleusinian mysteries, 192 f. 

Emancipation, 164. 

Ephesus, 20; life of, 52; Church 
of the Baptist at, 66 ff. 

Epictetus, 164. 

Eternal life, 108, 146 ff. 

Eusebius, 13, 20, 21. 

Evolution, Greek idea of, 58. 


Faust, 63. 

Fish, 144. 

Fountain of Youth, 115 f. 
Friends of Jesus, 226. 
Fruits of the Spirit, 226. 
Fullness, 40, 144 f. 


Galilee, come out of, 156f. 

Gardner, 17, 30, 58 f. 

Garvie, 13, 17. 

Geographical knowledge, 23, 109, 
1267: 

Gnostic ideas, 35, 163 f. 

God, idea of, 51. 

God is spirit, 120. 

Goethe, 63. 

Goodspeed, E. J., 6, 199, 258. 

Gospel according to Hebrews, 
154. 

Grain of wheat, 207 f. 

Greater works, 172, 220. 

Greek Philosophy, 39; see also 
Philosophy. 

Grenfell, 71. 

Grill, von, 84, 260. 


Healing at Capernaum, 122 ff. 
Healing at the pool, 126 ff. 
Healing of blind, 167. 
Heraclitus, 60. 


Tdeal disciple, 16 f. 
Trenaeus, 21. 
Isis, 177. 


“T” style, 25, 48, 133 ff., 177, 216. 


THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Jackson, 17. 

James, son of Zebedee, 14. 

Jesus, emphasis upon historical, 
32; divinity, 51; incarnation, 
59; work, 234; death, 180f. 
207 ff., 227; resurrection, 247 
ff.; relation to his disciples, 
215 ff. 

Jews, attitude toward, 29; see 
also Judaism. 

Jews as objectors, 47, 91. 

John, the Apostle, 12 ff.; charac- 
ter of, 15; early death of 13 f. 

John, the Beloved Disciple, see 
Disciple whom Jesus loved. 

John the Baptist, 30, 66 ff.; 109 f. 

Joseph, son of, 77. 


Judaism, 66; represented by 
water, 84; perfect Judaism, 
Wak 


Judgment, 105 ff., 135. See also 
Day of Judgment. 


Justin Martyr, 162. 
Kennedy, 97. 


Lamb of God, 49, 71. 

Last hours, 288 ff. 

Last supper, 16f. See also Com- 
munion. 

Lazarus, 188 ff. 

Life, 39f., 108, 124f., 151, 188, 
190 ff. See also Eternal life. 

Light, 37 f., 200; Greek idea of, 
161 f.; emancipating power of, 
164; Gnostic usage, 162. 

Light of the World, 154 ff., 159 
fs163:157167 

“Little while,” 230 f. 

Logos, 59 f., 61. 

Lord’s supper, see Last supper. 

Lost sheep, parable of, 175. 

Loyalty to Jesus, 42, 223 ff. See 
also Belief. 


Manna, 149. 


INDEX OF 


Martyr list, 14. 

McGiffert, 103. 

Messianic Age, 103. 

Miracle, 123, 187, 242f. See also 
Works and Signs. 

Misunderstanding, 98. See Jews 
as objectors. 

Moffatt, 14, 17, 21, 24. 

Mysteries of Attis, 190 ff. 

Mysteries of Isis, 1983 ff. 

Mystery Religions, 25 f., 97, 145, 
190 ff., 232. 


Names, significance of, 109. 
Nathanael, 78. 
Nicodemus, 94 ff. 


Order of events, 55, 87, 126. 
Osiris, 64. 


Papias, 13 f., 20f. 

Papyrus documents, 45 f. 

Paul, 31, 33, 34, 51, 135, 151, 179, 
200, 225f., 250; conversion of, 
169; influence on Fourth Gos- 
pel, 26, 34. 

Perish, figurative, 105. 

Persecution, 175, 227, 229, 231. 

Peter, 246, 254. 

Philo, 61, 143. 

Philosophy of Greeks, 38. See 
also Gnostic ideas, and Stoic- 
ism. 

Place of writing of Gospel, 20. 

Plato, 22, 60. 

Plutarch, 64. 

Polycarp, 21f. 

Popular Quality of John, 45 ff. 

Popular Style, 76. 

Popularity, present, 55. 

Prayer, Jesus’ parting, 233 ff. 

Prayer tone, 49. 

Preéxistence, 25. 

Presbyter John, 20. 


SUBJECTS 267 


Psalm, Twenty-third, 176. 
Purpose of the Gospel, 31. 


Reason, 62, 64. 

Reclining at table, 205 f. 

Regeneration, 97. See also Birth. 

Religion first in Gospel, 31. 

Religions of Ephesus, see Mys- 
tery Religions. 

Repetitions, 49. 

Resurrection, 92, 195, 198 f. 

Return of Jesus, 228. See also 
Second Coming. 

Robinson, J. H., 5. 

Robinson, B. W.., 261. 


Sabbath observance, 129 f. 

Salvation, 106. 

Samaritan woman, 114 ff. 

Save, Savior, 106. 

Schwartz, 14. 

Scott, E. F., 24, 29, 38, 199. 

Second Coming, 51, 132, 218 ff. 
See also Apocalyptic. 

Sermon character, 53 f. 

Serpent uplifted, 101. 

Shepherd, the good, 174. 

Sign, 79, 85, 89, 123ff., 143, 148, 
254. 

Simplicity of illustrations, 
See also Popular. 

Sin and sickness, 130. 

Socrates, 22. 

Son of God, 182 ff. 

Son of Joseph, 77. 

Sources, evidence of, 251 f. 

Spirit, 43, 99; coming of the, 
221f., 253; incarnate in Jesus, 
59. 

Stanton, 17. 

Stoicism, 60f., 111. 

Storm on the Sea, 145 f. 

Style of the Gospel, 25 ff. 

Symbolism, 33. See also Sign. 


52. 


268 


Temrplé, destruction of, 90. 
Tennyson, 201. 

Tenses, change in, 47. 
Testimony to Jesus, 136 ff. 
Theology, 50 ff., 172, 180, 207. 
Translations, 49. 

Trial of Jesus, 244 ff. 


Unknown God, 120. 


Vine and branches, 222 ff. 
Washing the feet, 209 f. 

Water, cost of, 114f. 

Water of Life, 115 ff. 

Water representing Judaism, 84, 
Way, the, 220. 


THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


Wedding at Cana, 81 ff. 

Westcott, 5, 13, 122. 

Wine, 152; at Cana, 81 ff.; Greek 
idea of, 84; as symbol, 82. 

Witness, 22. 

Woman taken in adultery, 154 f. 

Wonder, 124. See also Sign. 

Word, 59 ff. 

Words of Jesus, 133. 

Work of Jesus. See Jesus. 

Works of God, 148 f. 

Works, greater, 132, 134, 137f., 
186f. See also Greater works. 

Wrath of God, 112. 


Xenophon, 221. 


INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES 


(Bold faced figures indicate places of principal discussion) 


CHAPTER 

Genesis 
i - a 
XXVlil, 12 

Exodus 
xvi, 4 
0 Ae i | 

I Kings 
Xli, 22 

Nehemiah 

bisa Marae 

Psalms 
XXili 
cvll, 29 

Isaiah 
xlili, 16 : 
lii, 13—1ili, 12 
liii, 7 cas 
lxvi, 7 

Ezekiel 
XXlii, 41 

Daniel 
xu 2 

Hosea 
ot ae 

Amos 
vi, 4 


PAGE 


130 
80 


143 
130 


62 


127 


. 176, 206 


146 


146 
pin 
71 
88 


206 


135 


62 


206 


CHAPTER 

Malachi 
fay Bie 
wv, 2 

Matthew 
POEL OR ec snli@nl roe Ss 
RGA tia Ker Abe eae’ 
v, 14 


Wee Om LG eh ni-ee % 
hae Da ee 


Rael au te \ Sv 


je 0 la BL ey ee EY Uae 
MUO: “eri hialal elem 


mY, 24-38 06 os. 
BV BE ie le 


Xvl, 4 

BMille asia eg 

ae) 23s : 

XXV1 UP) eS NREL ote 
Xxvl, 75 

XXV11, 16 

XXVlil, 19 


Mark 


i, 3 e e e e ° e 


1 A 


ae ga eS 
RA ae ee 


17 

BONS) ee lie 

v, 36 

vi, 35 

Vv," 51 eh eh os 
Wi SeaO4 oe ak, 


269 


PAGE 


221 
43 


163 
145 
163 

78 
221 
102 
123 

89 
146 
173 

89 

97 
102 
204 
246 
254 
109 


69, 232 


e 


123 
130 
130 

15 
208 
102 
142 
146 
128 


270 


CHAPTER 


PAGE 


Mark—(Continued) 


Vili, 22-25 . 
ix seo 

x, 17-22 

x, 17, 30 
x, 39 

45.) | 
xi, 15 ff. 
x11, 36 . 
i a a 
XIV, 2 

xiv, 3 

xiv, 8 


xiv, 12, 16, 18 


xiv, 17, 20 
xiv, 34, 36 
xiv, 47. 
xiv, 58 
aiv; 72 

xVy 1 

ae SOP ae 
xv, 14, 15 
Xv, 34 

MV gee) elie 
XVi, 9-20 


1,3, 4 
Halen tea 
1a os 
Iaene 0's 
i. eee 
eat RAL ee 
Wi Cli ipeulis 
Viste 
vii, 44 

iy 50.) 
to) C1 
ix, 51-56 
m8. 1, 

x, 39,41 . 
RUGS Vis 
ie 12 

he ey ie 
Vil; 20) 21 


Luke 


s 128 
102 
99 

Shier it 
. 14f. 
164 
87 
236 
204 
240 
205 
204 
239 
16 
242 
241 

. 90 ff. 
246 
241 
88 
246 
231 
240 
155 


32 

89 
245 
123 
122 
123 
145 


. 204, 206 


210 
102 

12 

15 
196 
206 

89 
218 
176 
221 


THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


CHAPTER PAGE 
Luke—(Continued) 

EX, 445) 4. 3m 

xxii, 51 5 . ss) sae eeaeeae 

xxii, 62... » vc ee 

EXIV,).5 1.0... a8 spp peueleene a 


John 
11-18) 5 SS 6 se Pieas ae 
ind 59, 96, 167 
1232 39 
1.8 63 
1, 4b ic 5s (se, 45) oy) 
14, 5 0) cd le ipea et 
PRES fe - 49 
a ae 39 
in9.°10), 64 
ied... 46, 64 
1aLe 51, 64 
1, 19-51 66 
1, 19-28 31, 67 fi., 70, 74 
Loe : ake 69 
i, 19, 20 . 68 
eee re 49 
1, 21, 22 68 f 
23 5G 67 
1, 24 69 
i, 25 ery: “49, 91 
1, 26 . 82, 84, 99, 146 
1, ar ’ 72 
1, 29-34 “20 fi. 74 
17208 146 
1, 29 49,71 
i, 30, 31 y wie 
1, 33 ; 69, 82, 84, 99 
1, 35-42 7a fi. 
Vy pba 49 
i, 37-39 oot ee 
laana’.; oo RA 
i, 39 Re yp 5 
i, 40-42 J 0, eee Ole 
batt  » 46745076 
1, 42 49,76 
1, 43-51 ot er te 
, 45 36, 78, 150 


—e 
_s 

i 

for) 

. 


78 


INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES et gk 


CHAPTER PAGE | CHAPTER PAGE 
John—(Continued) John—(Continued) 
eM 79134, 936 | 634) oP er, 84 


Pee er) tere 79,184¢"| Hi836 Sw) 4) up 86 FP 112 
ON Ee ey? apd” ae. cle Saree ee cea co Wepre BR 
li, 1-11 ee eek, 2 ee Shiite, | Vat; 2 Ue er ar ae ee 
ieee at 5) RY.) 180° | iv, 5-15 114 ff. 
Ce ee eS TIS ies Poe a 197 
pee ere SCBA live 609. kG we RE Gia h4e 


Pe ee ee ee TART eA yf.) cu eB 96 
ap EE ES 7 es Se ac oe ea ks | 
ii, 13 A ee F109) iva ey eS R80 


Cee ere e  eeUk SGT. ivjhl6—45) . oy Sop LIS 
ree eee te se Hivmdte So): a. we TIS 
Ce met kL ere et NOU IOP LS) Pa. fy lee ee P80 
er ee ee Oe ST have Si-28). 180 
ee ee ORR EA TDA Pe eS a a ee 
ee eae Oe ieegoe kk oe IT 
Sy ero ive 82°54, 4. x eh ous 
Pe te Ae eee eet yon 37 fi49 sg) el PART 
Pomerat eee ORF ie 4a) ek gn BR 
er SP enOGI92 tae 45 as. we) RANE? 
eee 2) 91, 127) 19701 ty, 46-545 2 n ,. .189. fF 27 


MS. apr giby | art a 123 
rreeee mt) che) LIS pave 48-50..5 6 6) oh a USA 
od BeLOOivEs4 OS a> 4.) laser ad 


etic hy Gite Mae Ne Se 
OMe 3 sls) 1. eal eee 
WP ay Baile au, ox Ler ee 
Mi oe oreo APTOS 
LOPE ic, gly ey (AOS ey 
A ete RPA aes VET 
1099s HAs gs HA LO 
10 Pat deh soe ks ee 
20-2980n) eialSlito 150 ute 
SOM ees 4) ih 81847. Se eas 
Spe ees yo Je aa ae 
OS alata ISS 


Meee hohe 96,99; 172 
Eero. es «= 505100; 172 
eee ee on kt PNP 100 
praia)... 0101, 144) 208 
Gemoeey eS. 1 01f 148 
Pemeiees te Oy ha HOLOA EE. 
Pepe ee) eS, 1008105 
aenigee oe i 69965104 
PRUE oon las cs, £106 
ise ek 105, 107) 112 
iii, 19 . 31,36,51,105, 135,173 
Ie ee eure 5) 1088112 


~~ ~ ~ “ . 


7 


y - ~~ ~~ 


a<ss+4 44444444 


~~ 


Sees O meres a Ae 108 drat Vne4 ee oS 6.) 2 37; 51 fi 184k. 
ee meas ae at) Tet OOF rt 24090 PS Ol. ol le we TE OS 
rr eee wire SRT LOM OS) iithes ls a (BU, S185 
ee te ee HOMI LOD IESG. ve. te lob hes ee ERS 
RM ed Pula re LIOR 12 Me 8047. ee se te. PSB 
Seeeeeeeee 1) ad Poe TIT a Vt o1-47 5 =. ce Ss caw RASS 
eee te ee SR ACUI IA a VSL oie) ve tet PRL Se 
Peet aN aN el PLDT TSO. fe ee ee. Je)! oH ABB ABE 


272 


THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 


CHAPTER PAGE 
John—(Continued) 
VE Meio: 30, 52, 243 
vi, 1-65 MS ce 
vi, 1-14 oleae 85, 139 ff. 
EN TS aC Allah gee LOM? POG 
vi, 2 . 140, 148 
vi, 6 4 142 
Vio, 20, 9 ‘ 144 
vi, 11 . 142,144 
vi, 12 144 
vi i4 . 140, 145 
vi, 16-21 145 ff. 
vi, 22-51 pl ees Toe eee 
vi, 26 124, 140, 144, 148 
vi, 27 . 105, 148 
vi, 28 (aie 
vi, 30 ie . 140,149 
vi, 31, B21) dein a OR 
vi, 34, 35 . . 150 
Wash. 85, 168 
v1, 41-51 . 150 
Vi, 41742... ht 
Vil42.. 78, 150 
VE ABAAT 4 150 
WAUAR? BA os 151 
vi, 52. . 47,91 
vi, 53-58 49,151 ff. 
vi, 53 141 
vi, 63 141, 153,173 
vi, 67 Rival. 
vil, 1- 41 : 156 ff. 
vii, Be Bidel sieved ahaa SR NES 
vil, 4 Pv Pe gL Cs + | 
vu, 6 158 
CU ADE cl Uwe | ae SR Rae 109 
WEI PG ch) cet Vg om 158 
vl, 14 109 
vu, 15 50, 157 f., 172 
vii, 16, 18 159 
Wh BOL, 83 
vii, 31 . 159 
vii, 35 : 91, 159 
Vii, 37, 38 159 
vii, 39 83, 158 
vii, 40 hc Se ae ee 


CHAPTER PAGE 
John—(Continued) 
wil, 41°00.) 0 Nea 
Vii, 58—viil, 11 . . 154 ff.,157 
oe OS a 156 
viii, 8, 9 . Lesa 
viii, 12-58 157, 159 ff., 163 
vill, 12 ‘ OD 49, 157, 162 
Vili, 18 rr fe elt 163 
Wiis 20-85. 0 eee 227 
Vill, 28 “ 164 
int, 31 ff, 164 
viii, 31-36 +: ae 226 
Vili, 33 BES 91 
viii, 35, 36 Wi. 164 
Vlil, 37-59 oy seb) 0h 
Vili, 44 wi wy wet wie) eae nr 
vill, 48 oil) ‘ehieneiiocebeie 168 
WO Sa! Aa 166, 168 
Vins 64,56 bs ee 166 
Vill, 58 BS fo: 166 
bib: DRAM. 52, 223 
Te DET) eke ie 
ix, 3 . . 130,168 
1x, 5 walle’ 33, 38, 49, 167,190 
ae. GC TOU eee 46 
Oe UE ey hee 
£e,) L5SA0' eS! 6 eae 169 ff. 
ISM TS 1618 eae Ra eat) f° 
Teh Sen) pak eae . 172, 186 
5 age a I Pogo 173 
x p18). . So 
ORT Ak Si. 2 Sue an ‘ey ies 
x, 7-18 150, 177 ff., 216 
mie oes) caeie ee aca 
hela he Salen y tte 49, 227 
SP 1408 ue ee 180 
> Cas See Se 
shy Ee bale A PR, 181 
pe 0: al! je. en 
X, 24-38 182 ff. 
x, 30 51 
AE Lt Remy Ne fe 187 
34-36) 0). er 
X, 37, 38 185 f., 187 


o~ 


bd 
_ 


32, 188 ff. , 223, 232 


INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES 273 


‘CHAPTER PAGE | CHAPTER PAGE 
John—(Continued) John—(Continued) 
eI a ivan PoC fo. TOG WN SIV, LG cs. es ey 6) el? GULLS 
eer ae) Pee hog Peter S04 te ae ee 
IRI eee We ks 18, LOG b MEW BOI OS inl ae CEST BPO RG 
CS al ONS ea 162 | xiv, 23 sei oh liege Oo eT a Bare 
at ly UAW SIV) 28-28 lh, We a aa ee 
Rete ol eh) os ADS TRI BE be OR a eso 
Re OM re) chr casey LOO) UESAWG OTe gis od ch ol Pe 110 
Pk OY re 198 | xiv, 28... . .. 218,220,231 
> te 161 f,, 190, 197) Ev H-28 lsu 8k ed (a eo ee 
op Bb eed EL as at) ag as 
eee. BG SOO SR 4-10) os) cu att eek aR 
ee nt Ga ats LO PERV SU, 1 Geek GL, ays ahs Lek te Ene 
TE a ace a SOM PRU OT ok 8. ehh ced ee ON ae 
x1, 39 SC GR EB Die nutes at Oe ie Fo Us nel om 
x1, 47- 53 Cee Sea OL SRM PS: a NS ba ligtn gk eee 
met Gene cher POS Hee IG 8, oe! ile y een eas 
en ee il ae Gee SOR ARM) LEV 4050/4 BT SAO 
ou i Raat Mtl CONST SING 21th +: rn ae” 
Riese ren et) ot <a 204 a eee Pe V Sedo he yt ne BRM 
Ce et ee se ee feed TR. AGG ce! cob LBRO 
Te Cee ie) an At, OG, SOD IT SVE) 20-39 as nes SOUR 
Re Be aia ery OME OOE RWI OL) oi em! we ya Win gil ate Ae 
hey YA Es BO Mavis 2G. onal WE) a SS ee 
MARI ig eat a vel ROL; BOTUIU RUE AS. ena a eons 236, 250 
RARE otc es hy a ER ROR BeBe el ay eda ea BBE 
erie meen site 6 1D e400") ECM Del.) See tes eu leet 106 
er er eter re AAO Ea ee ae oe ae 
er GE UL eis 8151 (a Od Bee TP KVANINANER ool. eee ah OSS 
xili, 15 enn e tee te eae Le) ey Svat 1 t Ve he aaibiede Reeser ® 
Me ol ee OAC PSP T le ao ge RARE 
Xlil, 23-26 Pet eee Re Sy BEN CB ei gk gis gel SOAS 


xill, 23 YUL AN ake card Soni aie eee 
BDeerOr ie £745, 249. OSI PSV Oy de Pall et ie 204, 242 
Cb ey RN LS Re 8 et REED 8 DY 


MU ANG Merch sells) gi sey Ce) SVE, A3——NIg 16.900) 1 Qaee 
eR ek a ot) a) AR Eee | CAVES TO Oe egy air ae ee 
NE oes Viet Ag Ge te WRAY SEE ALO es ee) i oa un in ae 
ae a _218f,, 231/230. | XVHi,'20;.210 0... a RAE 
ct AG ORES i a 220 f. MV ee a eh How Ve a, Sols 
te SOUS REDS SUNIL ENS tesly ah > 4 sty Re rn er rma es 
ao,.10 ... pa et, TE 48 ya g 1h 2, Seg 240 
oe 79, 290 f. Be CSET NM Bi. 4 GV Peps: SMe Meer a 246 f. 
ry EAE IST aOR ARCS: 1.40 Ob. ae: OA ode a BR ee 
coy OER ORES RUE LUA 6.4 SU Bibs». chad (: Sl a ara i aaa Cua et & 


274 


THe GOSPEL OF JOHN 


CHAPTER PAGE 
John—(Continued) 
XIx, 26—xx, 29 247 ff. 
SIR SOP. Ey ee ve oko 
xix, 28. . 141, 234, 249 f. 
RS Oi", 141, 249 f. 
Sie 1 . 240 
xIxp,eo a8 24, 250 
xix, 38, 40. 252 
LRT. OCA he del ty yells A SOOO 
Re OPP ay)! 5 vibe ip bs 251 
Se OP ie bY oaN sh ET Golem e cre VEE 
vo Ay Lee ha gels eee 
MM, ae he dis 15, 18, 213, 251 f. 
MY 19s Ns Abs ck ste eee 
xx, 13,18. 252 
Xx, 24 wile alae 
Xx, 29 . 251, 254 
SEBO wh ls oe, 0196, 254 
xx, 31. . .32,39,50,197, 254 
NXIND I athe Whos Wise pLG On, wae 
REL PPh ay x glint MoABNe Caer eee 
SEH) oa sess abode 213 
RIOAT debe <k eu ae dace se eee 
Xx1, 20-24 . . Baur «la bey by, 
wet OW, sh) . 213, 245 
SER Aas <2 2 m4 
RAS ean wus 22, 254 
p24 hie gee 117 
Acts 
TAG ss aes io eae Lr AOe 
Ci re alia ha be iat Pate 
ieee as 99 
i, 4 alte al alt Seale Its 83 
te Te SR AR  F2) 
NERO RA + ji6.< Be Come ee De ee 
WEL ADO We. ky cele eee a eee: 
Kall BB ied, 2) ie. Wea rell tenes 
ele ee are ey 220 
TOP i ais tt eis ial 00 te LUO 
BMS eg ket tat ty og’ s MRS MR 
a A YA Fe a eee 120 
BeUee Cl cel ne 75 
APTI AW ele. © 6) eee ake sae 
XVill, 24—xix, 7 . . 31,66,73 


CHAPTER PAGE 
Acts—(Continued) 

IK es aie : «1 84 
XIX}, Ou» 8 Ae. = bee 84,99 
Romans 
TUPLE oy 2 a 89 
v, 2 reer 
Vipie: wae bs 0 
Vip da ao 
Vi, 905... Dee by ee 
Vide LL61B. . visi" sine 
Wai, 1+ <2 yy sca) oe ee 
Will, 20) x: Ss: ace e+ ee 
WIN 1D) ccs SP on 
3's ne. 
I Corinthians 
i, 14 . a 6. od Seu it en 
i, 18-21 s Abe on te ne 51 
lii,.11, 16-3. 2 5. “ee 
V1,.20.. 4 J <2. ee 
Vil, Qdiu 0 2 
Xi,/29 ff). 3. 
Si, 14.5 2. a ee 
XI, 27. 4... ee 
xv, 51 =. ee 
II Corinthians 
Pee of, Se 40 
IV, 6-27.) 5 
vid on. 219 
v, 5 rere ye 
vi, 14—vii, 1 . 155 
Galatians 
i, 16 169 
ii, 14 . era 
ii, 20 , | «a eta eae 
1116-9 .. . <a) ee ee 
bys 4 164 
iv, 24 5 ge 176 
Vi LS nk et cae 35 
i ee 
Ephesians 
B23 8 


INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES 275 


CHAPTER PAGE | CHAPTER PAGE 
Ephesians—(Continued) Hebrews 
Omer rire te) <) eORRO! Liv) FB ld 209) RN SAR? el gg 
Bete re or ae 
PEt es ete ig tw | AA James 
iv, 13 144 }\ ss 
’ < he * : ‘s < y ll ail 24 e . e ° e e 51 
boy EhOo Lg SRER H onan 
Philippians IT Peter 
i; 93 sl " ‘] . ‘ F 198 ll, 20 ° . . ° © e e 130 


fit ea NE Cl ae de 
Colossians ; 2 


Weer ee tae ee) N44 I John 
Oc gina) a6 285, 7! 4) Pagal 
il, 9 . . . ° ° bad 2 144 if 2 ° e . ° . . e e 24 
Lent yal ie ee ee ESO |B 

6 


renee rameter 84, |g de ig 
I Thessalonians Webs Sree ie hie Pewinsa Wet) samen a 

iv, sh OE Sg CIO aa hy ees tae II John 

iv, eee kel ot aes 

er OP abi ka tS arty eae’ 
I Tymothy , III John 

RE ee LOSS EAAI OT Eos 8 ek ie st ol eh oh a BB 
II Timothy Revelation 


SMM dete thc tee. o 16. fy XIXe 13 f'* oh) 0 ae ict ol ele OO 





a i ' F a: Pail A) iy i 
C uy heal - ‘ a. '? 


Beh ray ih ea 


; 





ee 





a2 ve Ala 
4: a ih 





if 
i 
4 
Su 
* 
j ; }! i ; aC Pal 
i* , , : 
Mit 7 
4 { sf ' 
aa j 
f ; fi i “if / 
i ‘ a ae, ay 
bana wane 





HAS [ an) Hi MW) ay Poa Wig 





. 


ve sibibieltie aise 


IMM 


i 


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-U 


0112 10894 


Seis eb alee 
siBlaiaiene 


+ a ee ee 


# sole 


NT 


3 


il 


oe 
eelelsTalolefeiatelepete tele’ oss 


: 
eaenee 
cee eee eet ee * ffs 


vole 
eee pee eee pee 
see eae 


vista lacgioitls 1 
eee 2 2 > 
aferelirers 
gers e.se 
pis elece 
estes 
oielelels 
sleass 
Tefete 


vee 
wre a tatele! 


Talelelelelerelarstylalelels 
ase 


apie eosin 
tetas 4 
wea _ 
elelalecela, 
siete , steelers 
ceeedy aioe a 8 9 4.2 Ble Bite ge ae 
ae Siatesal prerese anes 
poe nas fons : aia a a a ee e's ® 
ete Pag Sit) 
+08 et 3 
mee Pai 
erges fagetinn? 
elects eee ees 
preeee #452 


Qieterceelee 
feb stetetelitateleieiecgias 
He RARREES: A alae f 
Resto ees : coeialetol letetet 
pibiaterzratetriest tate etetertieteriie aseis 
f siatetetatere alata stalelelatelelelelele'a! 
$19) £-9; 02290) 929.405 
fstetate: 
$0, t iti fateserere tie 
Paperse hese tee We tee cde te ve eer 


Mttetelare tibet eels Caste Mes Tene Be See Te 
> PP bare 
eth sh rte sterbtotat, ¢ fe oe ee Ole ew 


pee a gaara ae 


faletele tifste 

' Pees 

erty ot ete a atete rele gare 
, Steet tal aisicle a sett e flare bo erase o£ 8 
Saas sepad tesese ae te br acerts Seo eie as beara pete be ted Petpet be eeae | 
re * Dt ee aeete 

t SPR ewe he ae Afareleisie: ipiossceleteiele -eseipielereiys 

SBA: aia o Sisteierticitela pip as 01m 


jaletsiateletate 
ate tle ec ese t ® 


lalelate 
: eilatatatelatelalete’s 
; 
aletrledeleleietede 
Le winkeye fie tee r. fipie sais tie-2¢ creie @ eseis) ey ster? arity 
stafels Tete tatars: , pleteleteteletern: me aieleipinieleleie: ‘ af AL Geleles esc esses ft t ee ee ge eae ee et sie sh Se teas 
tee telatrletateletats Ee See T as eed heer es: : talaleletilelelelytelatete§ a‘sleleleleteie peleteleatalelelal tals stetelatelaleiees Hee eh Mneey aie? Jolie soteie. ese? 
‘ sigieiere Heiner elerere.s gies eels ele eee glee vatetate sialetenstelerstetete Serergtriptatelatotsrsttrtectaseenrere Ts ; a arelete Piela ee 2 8 Fe 8 
eletstete? Teietsieteeletsielalele’ ele! +t af aiatateatelt aletatetatetateraisterstsrararereger eee BIS Rie Rie Ole b araie 
; ars ’ oe 
. PP tele ie es Ote Sce BF FR ehee® ptetera hratelatitareselarisl “ eters 
eis airtel elaletelelate 
: pete ene el ate ® 
alelrieie eae 


Stites etiet 
Heleletelete 
selaty tat; fet titsestane tetra tastes totatscgsite! 
ete * 210 2 f° + - 
oF. 
4 ielelatare 
Brsecestsesritse, 
pratetatptetstal, 


¢ 4h *en) ae . eerene felete e 
state ety aielatpatetarets: sgiaie sFitel 
Pop esot hs oa pest te geet ht Or Seat ce se OE os 
wate elelete alates wiate’s wetates + 
elena ~ ele " ' fee . tiieletetets 
" Teinie > . elglela® 4 Aipieldlstetes . Tele v1 
sip isieiale poeta’ ieleag! sett Telefete ¢irtyialerelet erste? A a acainieiaseie 
“f t alele eebe yi ete el eveseinte H Stats 
i itinersreriester: sigieletelelelalelgieis Le Seae Es He Te et ea pesca ites Hs cat iptatetalalateteceg ret reetefetele 
Teoh @ gitiele > Tere tele: at st stat aes titate sai ere Bet Di geeisiecriaser gies? eitigiasere felptetalel eeigt pare “a 
aaletsiele Teta Tetar sie epee sereeeaes stsiste +. * tenant . {teleleteretatecerets 
Tet eTetetetelelpleleteis piecele ace : ese Fie e Fiel ele a Biel e gi ee ; wei alte yh eleie glee ‘ fete arate are 
tsete ve TEASE PSH Sagas Te eae girstestshcta-tstetots hr irletetoce 2 aPefoteletete testy : a eat thecelelelelalers 
Stethistsis eset ot et olelel’ pigtelarb pislerelereiele rets.e © oeeee: toboten 
stabetstels Sieits seererrie $2 eseseae Senet eee seae) Seleteieseres 
ereteierae 2 = 


iste} 
Perr ORT tes Piel ete lf ele 


ai rlptalaie etels 
wistele 
thaleipiete 


rletale 


ioe 
Sierute 
S525 


wheter 
Se ee 


astetels sietel stelete 


Telate Tebelet 


ne ee tn eed 


tpene betes 
= 





